The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
SIXTIETH CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION.
[Com plim ents o f Robert L. Owen.]
be made except for the paralysis that has fallen upon that
State, and other States in the Union are affected in like
manner.
SPEECH
I deeply appreciate the great financial crisis from which the
O
P
country is slowly emerging, and agree with the distinguished
chairman of the Finance Committee that this panic of 1907
“ was the most acute and disastrous in its immediate conse
quences o f any which has occurred in the history of the
OP O K L A H O M A ,
c o u n t r y t h a t “ the shrinkage in values of securities and prop
In the Senate of the U nited States,
erty and the losses from injury to business resulting from and
incident to the crisis amounted to thousands of millions of
Tuesday, February 25, 1908.
dollars.”
The Senate having under consideration the bill (S. 3023) to amend
•I agree with him that “ a complete disruption of the ex
the national banking laws—
changes between cities and communities throughout the country
took place.”
Mr. OWEN said :
That “ it is impossible to estimate the losses which were
Mr. P resident : In commenting on the financial bill, and in
suggesting improvements in it, I do so with hesitancy and diffi inflicted by this suspension of payments by the banks and the
dence. I feel, however, that the long experience 1 have had resultant interruption of exchanges.”
I pause to say that the actual contraction of exchanges in
in such matters justifies me in the hope that my comments
upon this measure may not prove to be without some service to the panic of 1S93, and in the panic of 1884, amounted to 50
the Senate in a proper determination of this exceedingly im per cent of the normal volume of exchanges. An examination
portant question.
of the reports of the Comptroller o f the Currency exhibits this
In discussing this matter, Mr. President, it should always be remarkable fact. When those exchanges are shrunken in that
kept in mind that it is not the welfare of the bank or of the manner, it means the most serious consequences to the com
depositor, however desirable these questions are in fact, that merce of this country, because the exchanges which are now
should be considered, but the real question to be considered is— current in ordinary times will amount to nearly two thousand
The prevention of panic.
million dollars a day. I have tried to get the Comptroller of
The protection and promotion of our National commerce.
the Currency to make a proper inquiry into the volume of this
The firm establishment of stability in business affairs.
exchange so that it might be definitely ascertained. It lias
The maintenance in active operation of the productive energies not yet been done, but it ought to be done, as one of the facts
of the Nation.
essential to a proper comprehension of this great question.
Panic is like a stampede in a theater at the cry of “ fire.” The When we have a shrinkage of what might be called an
remedy is, first, a fire-proof building; second, abundant avenues ephemeral currency in the form of those exchanges of two
of escape, wide open.
thousand million dollars, it means an infinitely greater difficulty
Mr. President, I am in favor of a bond-secured emergency in getting hold of the dollar. It means that the dollar has a
currency under an interest charge high enough to compel auto new purchasing power. It means that property loses its
matic contraction of such issue, and favor this principle in the measure of value in relation to dollars.
measure reported by the committee.
I agi*ee with the distinguished chairman of the Committee on
I
have listened with great interest to the explanatory com
Finance in describing the recent financial panic, that “ there
ments of the chairman of the Committee on Finance in rela was financial embarrassment on every hand and an impossibility
tion to the Senate bill 3023, as reported, and have studied with of securing the proper funds to move crops or to carry on the
care and interest the bill which has been so submitted to the ordinary business of the country.”
Senate by that committee.
That “ the suspension or disarrangement of business opera
There has been no subject of greater importance before Con tions threw thousands of men out of employment and reduced
gress in years.
the wages of the employed.”
It is in sCoi'uie to exaggerate the evil consequences to the
I agree with him that “ if the business interests of the coun
ccL.^.^^e and industries of the United States by the four great try are left defenseless through the inaction of Congress the
panics we have had since the war—the panic o f 1S73, the panic most serious consequences may follow\”
of 38S4, the panic, of 1S93, and the panic of 1907—and the vari
That it is “ the imperative duty of Congress in their wisdom
ous smaller financial disturbances of the same character, but to provide some means of escape from another calamitous
not of the same violence, which have occurred from time to crisis.”
time.
But I do not agree with his conclusion, that, because a com
FOUR ST R O K E S OF N A TIO N A L C O M M E R C IA L P A R A L Y S IS .
prehensive plan of legislation and reorganization of our entire
The disastrous effects of the panic o f 1893 lasted for five banking system may not be conveniently entered upon at this
distinct years.
time, the proposed remedies should be confined within the
These great financial disturbances not only ruin hundreds very narrow limits o f the bill proposed by the Committee on
of thousands of individuals and destroy their financial and Finance.
commercial life individually, but they exercise a wonderful re
The arguments of the chairman of the Committee on Finance,
pressing power on enterprises and make men unwilling to showing the great evils which w have endured in the recent
re
engage in enterprises of any kind because of the terrific history panic, and the serious consequences which must necessarily
that can not be forgotten, where thousands of honest, indus follow it, instead of laying a foundation for a very limited
trious, prudent, and enterprising men have been ruined through remedy gives the best o f reasons why the remedy should be made
no fault of their own.
as complete as possible. I confess that I feel deeply disap
There can be no greater evil to a land than the discourage pointed in the bill reported to the Senate.
ment of individual enterprises extending wholesale throughout
The bill reported by the Chairman of the Committee on
its boundaries. There can be no greater evil to a commercial Finance provides for bond-secured emergency circulation under
nation than the paralysis of the productive energies of its indi a G per cent penalty, but confines the banks which may receive
vidual members.
its benefits to only certain of the national banks, and to them
I am told that now in Pennsylvania one-half o f the industries only in a very limited way.
of that great State are silent and unemployed, losing millions
It makes the emergency notes national-bank notes in form
of dollars that ought otherwise to be made, and which would without any wfise reason.
31580—7444
Amendment to the National Banking Laws.
I I ON.
ROBERT
L. O W E N ,
2
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
It contains provisions for using railroad bonds for the basis
of these notes, which I do not believe to be fair and just to
the people of the United States, and it omits several provisions
of the most important character which I deem of the highest
consequence to the financial and commercial welfare of the
United States.
Mr. President, I have submitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by me which sets forth a fuller plan of relief, which
I believe to be far superior to that offered by the Finance Com
mittee, and to the provisions of which I earnestly invite the at
tention of the Senate.
While I shall insist upon the amendment which I intend to
propose, believing that its provisions are of the greatest im
portance, I shall nevertheless feel impelled to give my vote
to the bill as drawn by the Finance Committee, except its rail
road-bond feature, if the Senate rejects the suggestions offered
in the substitute I propose. I shall do so, Mr. President, how
ever, on the ground that the committee bill does offer some
measure of relief. It is better than no relief. The privilege
given to railroad bonds is, however, entirely unjustified and
utterly indefensible. I can not agree to give to railroad bonds
a property denied to United States bonds. The committee mea
sure gives to railroad bonds—mere bonds of corporations, owned
by private persons—a value which ought to be given exclusively
to public bonds, and denies this privilege to United States
bonds. I deny that there is any justification for the introduc
tion of railroad bonds in this bill. I deny the right of the
Senate or of Congress to give awray public values to private
interests, and insist that such a policy is utterly indefensible.
H bile this is true, Mr. President, it is also probably true that
the harm done by the giving of this public value o private in
terests is less than the harm which would be done if this
country should be left without any relief against future panic,
and, at least, we shall have the opportunity of correcting this
feature of the bill at some future time, if it be not row amended.
.
skall, however, insist upon the amendment of the committee
bill in this particular at the proper time.
In England, by ministerial permit, the Bank of England has
been on several notable occasions, wrhen panic threatened, au
thorized to issue emergency notes against other securities than
gold in violation of the English bank act of 1844, and such
emergency notes, being used in violation of the statute, neces
sarily are withdrawn at the first moment possible to the public
safety.
When the Senator from Rhode Island, on the 18th of De
cember, in answer to the Senator from Texas, said that “ legis
lation can not prevent the recurrence of similar crises in
the future,” I was astonished, Mr. President, because the senti
ment expressed by the Senator from Rhode Island wras at vari
ance with the experience of the leading nations of Europe and
was contrary to sound reason.
I have long been thoroughly satisfied that it is a perfectly
easy matter to prevent panics in this country. I have observed,
however, Mr. President, with interest that the chairman of the
Committee on Finance had evidently changed his views with
regard to this matter when he introduced a bill on January 7,
1908, for the avowed purpose of preventing panic and w grati
ras
fied when the chairman of the Committee on Finance, on Febru
ary 10, said:
But the serious defect of our monetary system, as disclosed by our
recent bitter experience, is the fact that we have no means whatever
for providing the additional issues necessary to meet or to prevent panic
conditions.
And when he further said, in closing his remarks, that—
If we should fail to take some effective action to provide against such
crises such as that through which we have just passed, we should assume
a grave responsibility.
Mr. President, the measure proposed by the chairman of the
Committee on Finance was particularly interesting to me be
cause it contains the correct principle, to wit, quick emergency
money on bonds under a penalty wrhich w
rould insure its auto
matic contraction.
Mr. President, the favorable view of the chairman of the Com
mittee on Finance on this subject, is a matter of the greatest
value to the country, and I call his attention to the fact that
A VALUABLE P R IN C IP L E OP T H E C O M M IT T E E MEA JURE.
he has adopted the essential principle in the bill reported by his
^n* *>res^ ent» toe principle of the committee bill which committee, which was contained in an amendment which I had
really has value, and the only principle which is o f impor the honor to draft, and which was introduced in the United
,
tance, is “ emergency notes, secured by bonds, under a penalty States Senate on February G 1900, by Hon. James K. Jones,
and which was proposed as an amendment to the financial bill in
higher than the normal rate of interest.”
lliis is the essential and vital feature of the committee meas charge of the Senator from Rhode Island, then as now, chair
ure which gives it value, and this is the only principle of the man of the Finance Committee.
Mr. President, I send to the Clerk's desk a letter from Sena
bill which gives it value. This principle of finance has long
tor Jones, with a copy of amendment referred to, which I shall
been well understood and has long been in force ir Europe.
to 1896 I studied this question and endeavored to write into ask the Clerk to read:
The VICE-PRESIDENT. Without objection the Secretary
the Democratic platform in Chicago the principle of currency
notes to be issued against bonds as a remedy against panic.
will read as requested.
. I he matter proceeded so far that the proposition was voted
The Secretary read as follow s:
into the platform by the committee on resolutions uid then w
ras [Law offices of James K. Jones, James K. Jones, jr., James K. Jones,
621, 622 Colorado Building. Telephone Main 638.]
voted out because of the argument made against it that it was a
W a s h i n g t o n , D. C., February 11, 1908.
novel proposition and untried.
There is no partnership in a measure of this character. It is Hon. R o b e r t L. O w e n , United States Senate, City.
D e a r S e n a t o r : I inclose a copy of the amendment which I offered
pure!y an economic matter, or should be, and I should not be
willing to have it assume a partisan form. I am referring to to the financial bill on February 6, 1900 ( C o n g r e s s i o n a l R e c o r d ,
p 1 5 3 4 ).
the position of the Democrats on that resolution committee. I
You will, of course, recall the fact that you prepared the original
do so, I think, to that extent, to the discredit o f the intelligence draft of this proposed amendment, which I introduced in almost, if
submitted by you. I think
ot that committee on resolutions. But it lies with equal force not in exactly, the form that time quite interesting you will find the
debate on that bill at
against the other party and all parties in this country, that
If that amendment had been adopted at that time ana
had been
late
there has been no provision made for the maintenance of our written in the law, it would, in my opinion, have preventer
panic.
. . .
commerce against this periodic disturbance, and what might be
I am glad to see that at last the principle of an emergency currency
regarded by some and was regarded by the Senatoi from Mary properly secured is recognized and that the Committee on Finance of
land [Air. W i i y t e ] as a necessary periodic question. I think ‘it the Senate indorse it.
Congratulating you on your early connection with this idea, I am,
proper to call attention to the fact that the periodicity of panics
Very sincerely, yours,
in Europe, where they have a remedy similar to that now pro
Ja m e s K. J on es.
posed by tips committee, has ceased. There is no erlodlcity of
A m e n d m e n t p ro p o se d b y J a m e s K . J o n e s, F e b r u a r y 6 , 1 9 0 0 :
panics there. You can have periodicity of panics whenever you
That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby directed to have printed
allow a bear movement to agitate the country and have the and to keep on hand United States Treasury notes under a special ac
count to be called the “ emergency circulation fund.”
Such notes
country itself unprepared against the necessarj excitement
shall be full legal tender. Any citizen of the United States shall have
which that movement may create.
the right to deposit United States bonds under rules and regulations to
Subsequently to 1896 I gave this subject careful study, feeling be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury, and to receive from
a deep interest in the evil consequence of the panic of 1893. In such fund 90 per cent of the face value of such bonds in United States
189S, in London, I discussed with the governors of the Bank of Treasurytonotes, and shall have the right at any time within twelve
months
redeem such bonds by repaying in United States Treasury
England the methods by which they controlled panic and in notes the amount so received by him on account of such bonds, with
Berlin consulted the officials of the Imperial Bank of Germany interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum on such amount. Failure
redeem such bonds
the limit of
as to the method of avoiding panic in the German Empire. It to a forfeiture of such within to the United twelve months shall operate
as
bonds
States, and such bonds shall
was in this way I leained the complete efficiency of emergency he sold to the highest bidder in the open market, and the balance, after
notes which would automatically retire under a proper penalty. the payment of the principal of the amount advanced, the interest on
the same, and the expenses, shall be paid to the former owner of such
(See Appendixes A and B.)
bonds.
Any moneys received from such sale may be exchanged with
Germany and Austria permit their Government banks to issue other moneys in the Treasury so that this fund shall consist alone of
legal-tender emergency notes under penalty of 5 per cent, which Treasury notes. The principal of all sums so advanced when repaid
to the “
and all
is higher than the normal rate of interest, thus procuring auto shall be returned shall be emergency circulation ofund,” T r e a s u r yinterest
upon such sums
p a s s e d t o the c r e d i t
f the
under
matic contraction of such emergency money.
miscellaneous receipts.
31589—7444
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
The actual amount of notes held in the “ emergency circulation fund
shall never he less than $50,000,000 in excess of any outstanding ad
vances. Said fund shall neither he increased nor diminished except in
the manner provided.
Mr. President, the amendment then proposed by Senator
Jones contains every essential feature which now gives value
to Senate bill 3023, reported by the Committee on Finance, and
just in degree as the committee bill has departed from the prin
ciples of this original proposition, just in that degree has it
lost value.
The original proposition provided for United States notes di
rectly, and not the awkward, irksome, obstructive use of the
pretended national bank notes o f 6,600 intermediary national
banks.
The original proposition provided that any citizen of the
United States had the right to obtain emergency notes upon
proper security of bonds, while the committee measure denies
the citizen and denies 18,000 banks and trust companies and
only permits some of the national banks to have this right, and
only permits such special national banks to have a very limited
amount of such notes, under additional restrictions by States,
which, in my judgment, greatly diminishes the value of the
proposed remedy. The restrictions go further and limit the
amount of notes given to particular States, which is a serious
additional restriction upon the means of escape from the danger
of financial panic by emergency notes.
The original proposition compelled the return of the emer
gency notes within twelve months, which the committee meas
ure does not do, and loses force by not making the return of
emergency notes necessary and compulsory within a given time.
The original proposition provided that the emergency cur
rency should never be “ less than fifty millions in excess o f any
outstanding advances;” in other words, it was not limited, as
the committee measure now proposes, to the inadequate sum, as
I shall presently show, o f $500,000,000. It took over two
thousand million dollars to meet this last panic, and then the
panic was not successfully met.
The original proposition imposed a tax o f 6 per cent on such
emergency notes, as does the committee measure now submitted.
The original proposition allowed emergency notes to the
extent of 90 per cent in emergency notes of the face value of
such bonds (United States bonds) and the committee measure,
in like manner, provides 90 per cent in emergency notes of the
value of bonds offered as security.
The committee measure enlarges the volume of securities
available, which, I think, is highly judicious and proper.
You will observe, Mr. President, that this proposition then
submitted to the Senate contains the very essence of the bill
now under discussion. It proposed bond-secured currency ad
vanced upon the security of bonds under a tax of 6 per cent
per annum, and that the advance should not exceed 90 per
cent of the value of such bonds.
Mr. President, if the chairman of the Committee on Finance
had, at that time, 1900, been conscious of the great value of
the suggestion contained in the then proposed amendment, he
was in a position, at that time, to have written into the statutes
of the United States the very safeguards against panic which he
now, with such force, declares essential. If he had then
patiently listened to this suggestion he would have saved the
people and the business interests of the United States what
he himself now describes as the “ most acute and disastrous
panic which has ever occurred in the history of the United
States.”
I pause to say that, if any Senator [looking at Mr. A l d k ic ii ]
wishes to interrupt me at any time, it will not disconcert me in
the least.
The Senator from Rhode Island would have saved his country
and millions of its people the enormous shrinkage o f values of
securities and property and the loss from injury to business
resulting from and incidental to the crisis amounting, as he
himself now declares, “ to thousands o f millions of dollars.”
He would have prevented “ the suspension or disarrangement
of business operations which threw thousands of men out of
employment and reduced the wages of those who were still
employed.”
He would have prevented the fear and distrust which has
now paralyzed and makes unproductive the energies of hun
dreds of thousands of men and holds idle many thousands of
factories and business enterprises.
Mr. President, I rejoice that the principle of good govern
ment and of sound finance which was presented then has now
been adopted by the Committee on Finance and is about to
become established as a part of our law.
I trust the Senator from Rhode Island will agree with me
now that if the present plan of emergency money had been pro
vided in 1900 by the amendment he was then unwilling to ac315 8 9 — 7444
3
cept we would have avoided the enormous injury of the panic
of 1907-8.
I regret, however, that in adopting the principles which were
submitted in the amendment proposed to the financial bill of
1900 the Senator from Rhode Island has not improved the
original suggestion, but has weakened its effectiveness in
various important ways, as I shall hereafter point out.
I submit my observations on the pending measure, Mr. Presi
dent, in the earnest hope that they may persuade the Senator
from Rhode Island and other Senators of this body to consider
the present bill with dispassionate care and without economic
prejudgment and with the greatest thoroughness before it is
finally passed, so that the bill when completed shall be drawn
as perfectly as the wisdom and patriotism of this body make
possible.
Mr. President, this Congress has abundant time in which to
perfect this bill. There is no need for haste, and those expres
sions in the public prints when Congress met, that there was no
need for haste, met my approval, because I have observed that,
if there is one thing which has been thoroughly well established,
it is a perfect divergence of opinion on every kind of proposition
relating to this question. The only thing which has been thor
oughly well established, I think, is lack of knowledge and of
coherent opinion on the part of many of the statesmen of this
country with regard to this great remedial legislation now pro
posed. This condition of uncertainty justifies and it imposes the
duty upon every man who owes allegiance to his State and who
represents his State on this floor, to study this great question
and determine it according to those correct principles which
have been demonstrated by those older nations of the world,
who, under their experience, have learned a lesson which our
younger nation appears not yet to have acquired. Congress has
not only abundant time, but it has at its disposal every essential
fact upon which to make up its judgment.
It not only has the time and facts available, but it has all
the wisdom and intelligence necessary for the framing of a
perfect statute, and I earnestly insist that the measure to be
adopted by the Senate of the United States shall be drawn so
as to remedy at least those defects in our present national
banking act which are perfectly palpable and obvious to every
thoughtful student o f finance.
T H E P R IN C IP A L CAU SES OF P A N IC .
Mr. President, in drawing a measure of relief against panic,
which this bill avowedly is, it is of the highest importance to
determine what the causes of the panic are. I do not sympa
thize with the chairman of the Committee on Finance when he
speaks of the causes of panic being an academic question. It is
a practical business question, upon which this Senate has a
right to have all of the facts available; but there are some
facts which are so patent that they need no assistance to be
made perfectly clear to the knowledge of this body. When the
causes are clearly discovered, a remedy can be more easily pro
vided. I shall, therefore, endeavor to point out the principal
causes of panic.
The primary cause of panic is the fear of the people of the
insolvency of the banks.
The real cause of a panic is when the depositors, who number
millions upon millions of people, go into a bank, draw out their
small deposits of forty or fifty or a hundred dollars, carry them
home, lock them up in a trunk, and hide them away. There is
the chief evil o f a panic. The depositors drew out of the New
York banks two hundred millions of dollars within a week, and
they drew out of the banks of the country an infinitely greater
sum. I have felt great pride in the people of Oklahoma that
they had the nerve to stand film and not withdraw in any seri
ous way their money for hoarding.
The causes leading to the fear of the people a re:
First. The rumors of bear manipulators alleging “ tight
money,” “ high interest,” and “ impending panic,” and rumors
of threatened insolvency of banks, caused and promoted by those
engaged in the manufacture of bear markets, and of panics,
whether small or great, as a chief agency in compelling a bear
market. These rumors and thousands of others intended to dis
turb confidence flow in endless stream from the gamblers on
the stock exchange, the great panic breeder.
Second. These rumors have sound foundation if those engaged
in producing panic are strong enough to cause tight money,
high interest, and the constriction of credits in the great money
centers; if they can and do withdraw at will millions for
hoarding; or if they can and do call “ demand loans” for im
mediate payment, when they have already put a strict limit on
the extension of credits by the great controlling banks; if they
force into bankruptcy and ruin individuals, banks, and trust
companies, or commercial enterprises whose property they covet,
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
4
they can cause insolvency and produce that fear in the minds of
the people which causes hoarding and panic.
Third. These rumors, causing the fear of the people, easily
gain force, because—
(а) The banks know that the country’s reserves in New
York are tied up in gambling operations on the stock exchange
in so-called “ quick assets ” but which are not really available
to any great extent (because it would mean panic to force the
quick liquidation of such loans). There is a world of men who
have “ got to be helped ” in such times, as the bankers say,
and those loans are carried over.
(б ) The banks know there is only 74 per cent of money in
total reserves in all of the banks in the United States in cur
rency, and that if the fear of the people is aroused, and that
if 5 per cent of their depositors demanded their deposits in any
one week there would be a fearful panic, and the banker’s fear
is hypnotic of the people and excites the fear of the people in
ways too numerous to mention—e. g., by
1. Refusing good loans, well secured.
2. Forcing solvent debtors to urgent settlement.
3. Talking hard times and tight money, etc.
All of those things make the banker himself the medium of
emphasizing these conditions and bringing about the very con
dition which creates and makes panics. Any business man in
this Senate knows that I speak the truth when I call attention
to these things. I have helped guide the leading bank in my
State through two panics, and I understand the anxieties, and
X think I understand the causes of panics.
(c) The banks know that the 15 and 25 per cent reserve in
lawful money is largely artificial and does not exist in lawful
money, as a matter of fact, and that their showing of reserves
is only a pretense of a strength that does not exist.
These sentimental influences lead with certainty to the fear
of the people, and then we have as the final consequence the
deadly evil of the hoarding of currency hy tJbe common people.
Fourteen dollars so hoarded by each one o f the people would
not leave a dollar apiece in any one of the 23,000 banks of the
United States.
The hoarding by the common people, Mr. President, is not
the primary cause of panic, although a secondary cause, which
intensities and makes panic peculiarly dangerous. Hoarding is
the effect as xoeli as cause of panic. It is the necessary imme
diate consequence of fear or panic and becomes a factor in
panic of supreme importance.
Fear is the soul of a panic, and fear may be founded on any of
a number o f things.
It may be due to some national calamity which paralyzes
credit and excites public alarm.
It may be due to the wholesale speculative loans of the de
positors’ money, or to distrust engendered in the integrity of the
financial world from any cause. In 1893 the panic was arti
ficially produced by circular letters sent out all over the country
suggesting the constriction of credits; by repeated suggestions
in the public press that the European in\estor was selling
American securities; that gold was leaving the country; that
the gold reserve was going down day by day, and that we were
on the very verge of panic.
If you tell a depositor in a great variety of ways, and with
sufficient insistency, that we are on the verge o f a panic, finally
the more timid of the depositors will actually withdraw their
deposits for hoarding, and when this takes place the bankers
take fright, and the alarm passes like an electric shock from
man to man until the depositors who are poor or cowardly take
out their deposits for hoarding on a vast scale.
The cause o f the panic o f 1907 in like manner was very simi
lar. It was the result of a high market in stocks and bonds
steadily manipulated for several years, raising the booming ery
of “ prosperity ” and exciting the people into speculative buy
ing of stocks, and then the change of tune and the reiterated
talk and suggestion of panic made either by those who had in
view the creation of panic and its consequent benefits to them,
those culled beur operators ” or the bigger men whose satellites they are, or to the thoughtless talk of people wbo were in
different to the result or ignorant of the hypnotic power which
repeated public suggestion exercises over the minds of the
people.
These constant suggestions of impending panic were sufficient
to create a panic regardless of other contributing causes, and it
is well known to everybody that these continued suggestions
finally led to a general belief that a panic was impending. As
a necessary consequence there was more or less disturbance
in the mind of the average depositor, and only some incident,
such as the Knickerbocker Trust run, was necessary to start a
violent panic under conditions of general apprehension stirred
up in this way.
31589— 7444
The causes o f panic, Mr. President, which excite the fear of
the people may be various, but the fear of the depositor, from
whatever cause, is the real factor with which we must deal.
The fear of the depositor must be abated if we wish to pre
vent hoarding of the currency, which is so essential to the sta
bility of our commerce, to the healthfulness of our banking insti
tutions, and to the welfare o f our business people.
Two things are essential to prevent the fear of the depositor:
(« ) He must be assured that his deposit is safe, even if the
bank be found insolvent, and this remedy may be easily, eco
nomically, and abundantly provided by a guaranty fund avail
able from the taxes now paid into the United States Treasury
by the national banks on their circulation. It is thirty-five
times more than is necessary, according to our statistics.
(&) It is not entirely enough to satisfy the depositor that his
deposit is safe against the insolvency of the bauk of deposit, but
he must be assured that he can get his money in currency when
ever he wants it.
Banks confessedly solvent in the last panic, from the Atlantic
to the Pacific, about 23,000 of them, although solvent, refused
to pay currency to their depositors for the simple reason, Mr.
President, that the banks of the United States have only about
$7.50 with which to pay $100 o f their deposits, if the de
positors should suddenly want their money in currency. The
banks know this in a general way, and for that reason when
New York suspended currency payment in October last almost
every bank from the Atlantic to the Pacific followed this ex
ample within twenty-four hours. New York held the reserves
of the banks of the United States, and when New York refused
currency other banks felt compelled to do so.
The banks of Oklahoma, Mr. President, paid $40 a thousand
to New York banks for currency when the New York banks had
on hand the reserves o f the Oklahoma banks.
I believe, however, that the New York banks went out into
the open market on the street and bought hoarded currency;
I do not think they took it from their own money. So that they
are not to be understood as speculating upon their correspond
ents. I believe they did the best they could under a very bad
condition.
Mr. President, the first essential is the security of the bank
depositor.
The second essential is emergency circulation, and both are
essentials to the stability of our commerce.
Under our present banking system the uational bank deposits
are entirely safe, but the ordinary depositor does not realize
this.
The report of the Comptroller of the Currency, 1907, page 28,
shows the net loss to creditors of the insolvent banks since 1S98,
as follow s:
$42, 796
__
1898
3 6 1 .1 8 1
1899
__
None.
1900
__
117, 569
1901
__
1, 113
1902
__
34, 458
1903
__
201. 084
1904
__
4. 767
1905
__
None.
1906
__
An average of about $85,000 per annum against net deposits,
August 22, 1907, $5,256,000,000, a loss to the national bank de
positors of only about one dollar in sixty thousand dollars per
annum.
There never was in the history o f man a finer record of in
tegrity, of intelligence, and of good business than is shown by
this record of the national banks, and this country has a right
to be proud of that record.
If the future losses should average thirty-five times this
amount annually, the present tax on circulation paid by the
national banks would be mere than sullieitnit te meet it. be
cause— and i call your attention to the fact—2 per cent on
over six hundred million dollars makes an annual tax on the
national bank circulation of more than three million dollars
with which to pay the average loss of eighty-five thousand dol
lars. The depositors are safe now comparatively, and it is
only for the moral effect after all that the insurance of these
deposits will prove to the country to be of great value.
The security of the bank depositor (by permitting the present
tax on circulation to be used for the insurance of his deposit)
would prevent such depositor from losing confidence and hoard
ing his deposit.
There would be a much smaller need for emergency circula
tion if this self-iusurance plan were provided. The emergency
currency is intended to restore to circulation the money with
drawn from commerce and hoarded by the frightened depositor.
If the depositor has the assurance of safety in his deposit
he will not be frightened and he will not hoard his money, and
there will be, probably, but little need for emergency currency.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
Both provisions, however, Mr. President, I regard as essen
tial, because the national banks comprise only 6,600 institu
tions out of 23,000 banks. The national banks have only onethird of the banking deposits of the country, and emergency
currency is necessary, therefore, to protect the country against
the fear and the consequent hoarding of the depositors of the
other banking institutions of the country who keep their re
serves with the national banks.
Mr. DOLLIVER. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Iowa?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. DOLLIVER. Has the law of Oklahoma for the guar
antee of deposits been put into operation?
Mr. OWEN. It has.
Mr. DOLLIVER. I should like to ask the Senator how it has
operated as respects the situation o f the national banks? As I
understand, the law is applicable only to the State banks.
Mr. OWEN. The Senator is mistaken with regard to the
law being applicable only to the State banks. It is also ap
plicable to national banks where they choose to use their un
divided profits for the purpose of buying insurance under the
State plan, which, I think, they can do by the consent of their
stockholders.
Mr. DOLLIVER. Now, if the Senator will pardon the in
terruption, as he is evidently an expert in practical banking
matters, what would be the effect upon the national banks of
Oklahoma provided they were not permitted to take shelter
under that State law?
Mr. OWEN. It depends upon the condition of the bank. If
there is a national bank in a small town where there is no
State bank, it would not affect it. If in a small town there
are national banks, and there is a little State bank across the
street with a big sign in gold letters that its deposits are guar
anteed, it would make the national bank lose deposits, and
the national bank would be compelled to take out a State char
ter. If, however, in a larger town, where a national bank was
thoroughly well established and its lines of business long contin
ued, such as the bank with which I have had the honor to be connected—the First National Bank of Muscogee— I do not think
it would have any appreciable effect.
Mr. DOLLIVER. Now, if it will not interrupt the Senatox*,
what practical effect would it have on State and private banking
institutions of the country if a national law should guai-antee
the solvency o f national bank deposits?
Mr. OWEN. If that were done it would impose upon the
State the duty o f doing that which I now insist this Government should do— insuring the deposits o f national banks or pro
viding for self-insurance. If this Government should now pass
an act insuring the deposits out of the tax p re sse d — it is selfinsurance by the banks, not insurance by the Government— if
that were done, it would then have the effect upon State banks
such as the Oklahoma law now has on national banks. In the
substitute which I have proposed, i have arranged that it shall
not go into operation for two years, so as to give opportunity
to the other States in the Union to establish a similar iusurauee
plan within their respective limits. The substitute which I have
proposed only goes into immediate operation where the State
has already established a plan of insurance for the State banks.
Mr. DOLLIVER. Now, Mr. President, if the Senator will
permit me one more question, I will not interrupt him any
further.
The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Iowa?
Mr. OWEN. I will be delighted to answer.
Mr. DOLLIVER. What effect would it have upon solid, con
servative, well-managed banks if an act of Congress were to
put all national banks upon exactly the same level so far as
their ability to pay their dej>ositors is concerned? What effect
would that have upon the solvent, well-managed banks as against
irresponsible, or more or less irresponsible and speculative
banking institutions, offering lai’ge sums as interest upon de
posits, and otherwise making themselves attractive to the com
munity?
Mr. OWEN. I am delighted to have the Senator ask the
question, and I think I can answer it. The Senator from Iowa
assumes that there is a class o f speculative, reckless bankers
under no restraint who might rush in and acquire the deposits
of the unsuspecting. By what argument is a deposit to be
brought to a bank conducted by a speculator or a reckless, irre
sponsible man? Everybody who is acquainted with the bank
ing business knows that the depositor first wants to know
above all other things that the bank at least is conducted in a
conservative and in a reasonable and proper manner, and when
a depositor makes-----31589—7444
5
Mr. DOLLIVER rose.
Mr. OWEN. I will answer the question if the Senator will
permit me. I have not gotten to the answer yet. I am laying
my premises. I will answer it if the Senator will have patience.
He has asked me a question and I will answer it to his satis
faction, unless he wants to ask me another question.
Mr. DOLLIVER. I just desired an answer to my question.
Mr. OWEN. I am going to answer the Senator’s question
completely.
You are assuming in your question that the irresponsible,
reckless banker is going to atti*act the depositor. I therefore
go directly to the causes which lead a depositor to make his
deposit. What are those causes? The first thing he wants
to know is that the banker is a decent and an honorable man,
and under our system of banking wr have the most abundant
e
provisions thrown around the oi'dinary banker. I take it that
the State of Iowa has a proper law requiring a reasonable
control and requiring reasonable compliance with those pro
visions found necessary to sound banking.
But I want to call attention to the fact that under our sys
tem o f government any man who is guilty of fraud as a banker
is guilty of a criminal offense, and is restrained by the criminal
code. Under the substitute which I have suggested here, the
insurance plan only goes to the noninterest-bearing deposits
and the man who wants to invite into the bank deposits by
giving interest and paying people to make deposits with him,
the deposit being otherwise guai'anteed, has no foundation on
: earth to invite those deposits except his own bad character;
and that is not a good magnet with which to attract deposits.
When he established his bank he must comply in the first place
with the law and he must put up his money to establish his
|bank. The smallest of the national banks must have §25.000
; of capital and the stockholders are liable for a like amount,
making a bond of $50,000 standing between the depositor and
loss. Therefore these objections which are made that it will
encourage leckless banking have no genuine foundation.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
j yield to the Senator from Michigan?
[ Mr. OWEN. I am delighted to yield.
Mr. SMITH. I should like to ask the Senator from Oklahuma whether he knows of any State in the history of our
Government that has guaranteed deposits except his own ?
Mr. OWEN. I do not know of any State that has guaranteed
deposits. I understand in the history of the past that there have
been some such experiences, which were based upon an insuffi
i cient foundation.
Mr. SMITH. I should like to say to the Senator from Okla
homa that as I am informed the State of New York once tried
an experiment o f that kind, extending over a period of about
twelve years, and that it resulted most disastrously to that part
of the safety fund, and that they failed to raise enough to pay
the bad debts o f the banks which were members of that socalled organization, and that they fell shy several million dol
lars o f being able to pay out finally.
Mr. OWEN. If the Senator from Michigan will make his
suggestion sufficiently definite I will undertake to get the sta
tistics and 'account for the reason why they failed, but I am
now talking about a modern condition and I am not talking
about the poor and ineffective kind of government we had in
the days o f our ancestors.
Mr. SMITH. For the information of the Senator from Okla
homa, if he is willing-----Mr. CAVEN. I am delighted.
Mr. SMITH. I may further say that the legislature o f the
State o f New York did, under considerable pressure, pass a
law providing that all banks seeking recharter and all banks
newly organized should contribute to a safety fund one-third
of 1 per cent upon their capital, and that from that source for
a period of twelve years a large fund was set aside for the
purpose o f paying the bad debts of the banks of that State.
As I said a moment ago, that ran along from perhaps 1830 to
1845, when the statute was repealed, the pi*actice was discon
tinued. and banking was left, as it ought to be left, to the
Individual initiative and to the individual responsibilty or the
corporate i*esponsibility, whichever you may see fit to denomi
nate it.
Mr. OWEN. That is no doubt an interesting historical cir
cumstance It arose in a time when there were no railroads,
when there was no means of communication, when it took a
week to get a letter from one end of New York to the other,
when there were no newspapers worth mentioning, no telephone,
no telegraph, no public schools, a very defective Government;
when they had no sufficient and proper means o f examination
6
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
of the banks; and we have to go back to such conditions in
order to justify us in adopting the experiences of that date as
a guide for the present. There is no true parallel. To-day
we have the most perfect banking system in the world in the
national banks of this country, I think. Their losses to their
creditors during the last nine years have averaged only about
one dollar in seventy thousand a year. There were losses
of eighty-five thousand per annum only, out o f nearly six thousand million of deposits; and shall we go back and point to
1830, the days of our great grandfathers, and have it said that
we shall not avail ourselves of modern knowledge and modern
appliances? We have improved since that day, and we can
improve still more.
^f1' BAILEY. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Texas?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. BAILEY. I suggest that when the Senator from Okla
homa undertakes the New York investigation, if he will extend
his research a little, he will find that the State of Michigan once
enacted almost precisely the same kind of law in regard to the
insurance of State bank notes, and that it failed.
M
x\ OWEN. That justifies the Senator from Michigan.
[Laughter.]
Mr. SMITH. It may justify the Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. OWEN. There are some obvious defects in our national
banking system, which have been factors in producing the panic
of 1907-8, which ought to be remedied. For example—
(а) The tying up of the resources and reserves of the banks
of the United States in loans for speculative purposes when
their resources should be available for legitimate commerce,
for manufacturing and industrial enterprises, for moving the
agricultural, mineral, and manufactured products of the coun
try.
(б) The loaning of funds to active officers of a bank without
proper safeguards should be forbidden.
(c) The cash reserves should be strengthened.
All of these things are advisable safeguards against panics,
and should be provided for now while a bill is pending the
declared purpose of which is to prevent panic.
Mr. President, I wish to point out clearly what the bill re
ported by the Finance Committee contains and in what way it
is objectionable in its present form.
Second, Mr. President, I wish to point out what this bill
ought to contain and what the substitute therefor, which I
propose to submit as an amendment, does contain.
W HAT THE
C O M M IT T E E
B IL L
C O N T A IN S.
First, Mr. President, while the committee bill recognizes the
importance of emergency money, it limits the issue to $500,000,000 of emergency notes, which has been demonstrated with
great force by the chairman himself to be insufficient in volume,
and then imposes restrictions that will prevent any but a frac
tional issue of the volume suggested, and closes every door to
relief until the Secretary of the Treasury declares an emer
gency. The Secretary of the Treasury should have 'ao authority
to refuse relief or to defer it because within a few days irrep
arable damage may be done the bank on which a heavy run
may be precipitated.
You take such a case as that of the run on the National Bank
of Commerce in Kansas City, a bank which had nearly $40,000,000 of resources and which stood up and paid $18,000,000 to its
depositors before it pulled down its flag in surrender. There
was a case where an emergency might not be declared by the
Secretary of the Treasury as a national matter, and yet it was
an emergency of a critical character for that great institution
and for the entire Southwest. The remedy ought to be left
wide open so that any bank that wants relief shall be able to.
get it, and get relief immediately.
. Second, the committee bill makes the emergency notes na
tional-bank notes in form, requiring 6,600 varieties of notes
without sound reason, when these notes are really made United
States notes payable in gold or its equivalent.
Third, the national banking associations are not permitted
to take advantage of this bill unless they come within certain
rigidly described classes, thus limiting the efficiency of the
proposed remedy and preventing its full and free exercise.
(а) No national backing association which has less circulat
ing notes outstanding than 50 per cent of its capital is permit
ted to have the benefit of relief against panic.
(б ) No national bank which has a surplus o f less than 20
per cent is permitted to have relief against panic.
(c) In no event is any national bank to have any relief in
emergency notes exceeding a gross amount of its outstanding
notes, whether normal or emergency, in excess o f the capital
and surplus o f such bank.
31589— 7444
( d) Even under these unnecessary, vexatious, reactionary
limitations, the national banks within the classes described are
only permitted to have relief o f a limited amount of these
emergency notes, apportioned off to each of the several States,
regardless of the national exigency.
Fourth, no State bank, no trust company, no savings bank, no
private bank, is permitted to have the benefit of this remedy
against panic, although holding two-thirds of the banking
capital of the United States and less than 4 per cent currency
reserve, and, therefore, peculiarly dangerous to our financial
stability.
Mr. FLINT. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from California?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. FLINT. I wish to ask the Senator from Oklahoma if he
intends to make any observations with reference to the limita
tion on the issue to the various States? I f not, I should like to
ask him a question, as I am somewhat in accord with him in ref
erence to the matter of limiting the issue to the entire country.
Mr. OWEN. California could get only twelve million dollars
under this bill.
Mr. FLINT. I understand. But assuming that a condition
existed like that in the last panic and there is this limitation
of $500,000,000, and the currency is all issued in the State of
New York, California would not get any.
Mr. OWEN. It would under my plan, but it would be better
to supply enough to New York to prevent panic in the first
place, and still not deny California what it needed.
Mr. FLINT. If the stock market were eliminated, I -would be
perfectly willing to provide in this bill that the amount of cur
rency should not be limited. But if a condition should arise
such as existed in the late panic, I think it should be limited
as to the States, so that the entire amount should not be issued
to the banks in the State of New York.
Mr. OWEN. I shall discuss that further along. But I will
in brief make this answer: I do not think the emergency cur
rency should be limited in issue at all. I f New York needs
$50(4,000,000, I think New York ought to have $500,000,000,
without denying to San Francisco one hundred million at the
same time, 'if it proved to be necessary. Why is this relief
denied? What is the purpose of it? We are trying to provide
against panics, are we not? What is the sense, the common
sense, of denying a sufficient issue to make panics impossible?
Mr. FLINT. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield further to the Senator from California?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. FLINT. While we are desirous of stopping panics, it
may be that we are not desirous of encouraging a condition of
affairs in the New York stock market where speculators will
have this money issued and go on and deal in stocks and have
the prices advance four or five times their real value, which has
been the result when the money has all been concentrated in
the city of New York. The purpose of this bill, as I under
stand, is to prevent such a condition, and the reason the amount
is left to the Secretary of the Treasury or to the commission
composed of the Comptroller and the Secretary of the Treasury
is that the New York banks can not themselves determine when
they will promote stock-gambling propositions with this money,
but rather that the money shall be used to stop panics through
out the country and to relieve a condition that we know exists
in the West, and not only in the West, but in the South, each
year; and that is that we require more money at certain periods
of the year. If this was not left to the Secretary of the
Treasury, and if it was left unlimited, the entire amount, as I
have said, would he issued in the city of New York--at times
and not used to stop a panic, but used to continue a stock-gam
bling operation that has existed there from time to time.
Mr. OWEN. The purposes of the Senator from California
and my own are the same. We are in exact accord in pur
pose. The proposed substitute that I offer does not limit the
emergency issue to $500,000,000. It puts no limit on it. The
limit proposed is the necessity of the country alone. In this
last panic we required more than a thousand millions. The
estimate made by the chairman of the Committee on Finance
overlooks the most important item. We required over a thou
sand millions in this last panic, and that did not control it.
Why shall we now limit it to five hundred millions, and then
limit that amount in such a manner as not to make it available
where it is required?
More than that I agree with the Senator from California
with regard to the control of the New York Stock Exchange,
and I introduced a bill to-day proposing to remedy that evil in
some degree; that bill proposes that no Stock Exchange quota
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
tions shall have access to our national mails except under the
supervision and control of the Department of Commerce and
Labor under proper safeguards to prevent gambling and fraud.
That will put a stop to the gambling which robs the innocent
and unprotected in this country.
But I propose more in this substitute which I offer now to
the Senate. I propose that the New York Stock Exchange
gambling shall be limited by a provision on this bill forbidding
the national hanks to use their depositors’ money in making
loans for the speculative buying of stocks and bonds on that
market. They recently tied up all our national reserves when
they were needed to move the cotton crop; the wheat crop ;
needed to run the factories of New England and needed to run
the coal mines and the great works in Pennsylvania and the
other eastern States. It is high time that this country was
advised as to its rights and that the Senate should put a stop to
such practices; and I believe from the opinions which I know
the Senator himself entertains from his questions that he will
be in accord at least with the purposes of the suggestions I
make.
Mr. FLINT. I am not prepared to commit myself to the
measure, but I am prepared to commit myself to the views.
Mr. OWEN. I said the purposes, Mr. President.
Mr. FLINT. I want to ask the Senator another question, as
he has given some study to this matter and as he now refers to
the condition of affairs in the New York market and the loan
of money there deposited by the various banks throughout the
country. I desire to ask him whether or not he has given any
study to the conditions that have existed since the panic, to
ascertain whether the same banks which complained that they
could not obtain their money from the banks in New York have
not again deposited the money in New York, and are doing it
now, so that they have to-day a far larger percentage on deposit
in the New York banks than the condition o f the country would
justify.
Mr. SMOOT. More than they had before.
Mr. FLINT. And more than they had before.
Mr. OWEN. I think that undoubtedly is the case. They are
piling up money there now, and the money is coming out of
hoarding. Now that the opportunity has been presented by a
bear market to buy cheap stocks there is a strong demand" in
our tinnncial centers.
Mr. FLINT. What I wanted the Senator to answer is not
whether the money was coming out of hoarding, but whether the
banks in the South and the Middle West and the Pacific Coast
States which complained that they could not get their money
and said they would not deposit in New York again, did not
immediately after this panic was over deposit their money in
the New York center.
Mr. OWEN. I am not aware what the statistics would show
with regard to the redeposits since the panic in New York. I
do not think there could have been a very great deal of redepos
iting. Since the Southern and Western banks could not get
their money out when they wanted it they probably have left it
where it was. They could not get it when they wanted it, and
I guess they have left it there. [Laughter.]
Mr. FLINT. I am directing the attention of the Senator
not only to the fact that they left it there, but that immedi
ately after the panic they deposited more at the very place
from which they could not get it during the panic.
Mr. OWEN. I will answer the Senator by saying that the
substitute I propose requires them to keep it at home.
Mr. FLINT. That is the very question I wanted the Senator
to answer, whether lie had studied that question, and whether
he did not think it was necessary to have some legislation
which would compel the banks to keep their money nearer
home or in their vaults?
Mr. OWEN. Undoubtedly.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Utah?
Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
Mr. SMOOT. I should like to ask the Senator if he does
not know, as I believe every other Senator in this Chamber
knows, that banks in the South and banks in the West send
their money to New York for the purpose of receiving interest
on their daily balances, and also because the money can be
used better in New York than if it was left in their own vaults
at home. A draft upon New York is good anywhere in this
country.
Mr. OWEN. Except in panics.
Mr. SMOOT. It is for that reason that the money was there.
Continuing along the line o f the remark of the Senator from
California, I will state that the deposits in New York by the
banks of the West and also the South are greater to-day than
31589— 7444
7
they were at the time of the panic, and those banks are send
ing the money to New York because they have confidence in the
New York hanks and they receive interest upon those deposits
on their daily balances. The New York banks should not be
charged with this. The bankers in the West and in the South
want their money deposited in New York.
Mr. OWEN. I have no special concern at this time with
what the bankers want. I think it is a matter of small con
cern what the bankers want, or where they send their money
for interest. They do send their money to New York for in
terest and they do send it there under the invitation of our
notional-bank act, which requires the reserves to be kept in
large measure in these so-called central reserve cities, a word
that ought to be struck out of our statute, in my opinion.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield further to the Seuator from Utah?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. SMOOT. I fully agree with the Senator from Oklahoma
in that regard. I believe with all my heart that our reserves
ought to be kept largely in the banks at home, and I offered an
amendment here the other day for that very purpose, requir
ing them to' be kept there.
Mr. OWEN. I agree.
Mr. SMOOT. I do not want the New York banks to be found
fault with when they should not be, and when the business men
of this country themselves have brought about the conditions
complained of.
Mr. OWEN. I am not registering any complaint against the
New York banks. I am discussing a principle of finance and
of law on the floor o f the Senate. I have made no complaint
against the New York banks. I am obliged to refer to the New
York banks in discussing this matter because they are the cen
tral reserve agents practically to whom flow the reserves of this
nation, and when they use those reserves for speculative loans
they use them to the injury of my State and of my section and
o f my country—the United States.
I have provided a carefully drawn plan in the substitute
which I propose, and in my remarks I submit a careful table
showing how the plan will work out which I have suggested
with regard to these reserves, and I commend it to the attention
of the Senator, because I am sure he will agree with me. I am
sure that our objects are the same, our purposes are the same,
and we ought to be careful not to he drawn in conflict over words
nor over the mere form of this proposed law. I have no attach
ment to form. It is substance that I want. I want these re
serves kept where they belong, so that when our cotton crop
needs to be moved it shall move, and so that our factories shall
be employed and give the means of livelihood to the men and
women of my State; so that our people shall not be denied their
daily bread as the result of the thoughtless speculation of any
body. I have no feeling of hostility even to the gambler, but
when we discuss principles of law we have a right to refer to
those conditions which are before our eyes.
I call attention to the fact that this bill refuses any relief to
the State hanks and to the trust companies and to the savings
banks, although they occupy and control two-thirds of the bank
ing field in the United States. What is the reason for that?
Look at the Knickerbocker Trust Company with its sixty-seven
millions of deposits. There was no relief possible to that com
pany, and yet the run on that company helped to precipitate
the panic which locked up the currency of our great Republic
from the Atlantic to the Pacific in an incredibly short time,
within twenty-four hours.
This committee bill is defective in these particulars, and as
it is seriously defective in these particulars, I insist upon it that
it shall he amended «o as to meet the conditions of this country.
It is further defective in the following particular:
U N ITE D
STATES
BONDS
DENIED
THE
P R IV IL E G E
G IVEN
RAILROAD
BONDS.
Fifth, in the committee bill United States bonds are not per
mitted to be used as a basis for emergency currency notes, while
this privilege is given to railroad bonds, and language is used
throughout this measure by which to make effective this dis
tinction in favor of railroad bonds against United States bonds.
Railroad bonds should not have this public function, and United
States bonds should have it.
Sixth, the committee bill to prevent panic removes every
limitation on the contraction of .$000,000,000 of our normal na
tional bank currency, when some reasonable limit is necessary,
unless by inviting unlimited contraction of this currency we
wish to prolong low prices of commodities and prevent a prompt
reaction from the effects of the present panic.
Mr. ALDRICH. Mr. President------
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
8
The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Rhode Island?
Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
Mr. ALDRICH. Does the Senator think if a bank had a
hundred thousand dollars of United States bonds it would not
take out a hundred thousand dollars in circulation at a half
of one per cent tax instead of taking out ninety thousand
dollars and paying six per cent tax?
Mr. OWEN. I will answer that question. If I understand
this bill as^ drawn by the committee, while, of course, any bank
may use United States bonds for normal currency, yet nearly
all of our banks have their normal currency, particularly the
small banks—our Western banks. They have in large measure,
many of them, up to the face of their capital, and the emergency
notes possible under the committee bill are only as to the
surplus. Take a bank with $100,000 capital, for instance. Its
circulation is $100,000 of normal notes secured by United States
bonds at one-half of one per cent tax. And this bill denies such
a bank the right to use United States bonds for emergency
currency and invites the use of railroad bonds instead.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President____
The 1 ICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Utah?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. SMOOT. I suppose the Senator has noticed the report
of the Secretary of the Treasury, which shows that they only
have 67 per cent of the circulation they are entitled to.
Mr. OWEN. The New York banks, the Eastern banks, and
the banks in the big cities are the ones which are deficient.
The little banks in the country have very nearly their quota.
Mr. ALDRICH. The average is about the same through
out the country.
Mr. OWEN. Whether it is or not is entirely immaterial, the
point I call attention to is that a national bank which has
$100,000 of capital, with $100,000 of normal notes issued against
United States bonds, is confined by this bill to the $20,000 o f sur
plus, if it has $20,000 of surplus, and on that $20,000 of surplus it
may issue emergency notes, and those emergency notes so issued
shall not be issued against United States bonds, but may be
against railroad bonds. Such a bank can not use United States
bonds for emergency currency and can use railroad bonds for
such purpose. Am I right?
Mr. ALDRICH. The number of banks in the United States
that have the total amount of their circulation outstanding are
a negligible quantity. I would not undertake to say for the
moment how many there are, but I think less than 100 in the
whole United States.
^ rYou have not answered the question.
Mr. ALDRICH. Undoubtedly, if they had the full amount of
their circulation outstanding they could not take out any
further amount under this bill, except for the amount of the
surplus.
Mr. GW EN. W liy does the Senator from Rhode Island evade
my question? Why does he refuse to them the use of United
States bonds as to the surplus when he permits railroad bonds?
Mr. ALDRICH. Because, as I say, the number of banks
which have the total amount of their circulation outstanding
is so small that it is not necessary to make an exception, in my
judgment.
Mr. OW EN. It is a very remarkable exception. It is an
exception that I do not approve. A United States bond ought
not to be given second place to a railroad bond for any purpose
whatever, much less in a statute drawn in the Senate o f the
United States. In this case, when I ask the Senator whether
or not the United States bonds can be used in that instance for
emergency notes against that surplus, the Senator says, no, that
the United States bonds can not be so used, and I ask him why?
Mr. ALDRICH. I tried to answer.
Mr. OWEN. The effort o f the Senator from Rhode Island
to answer was a failure. The answer is insufficient. His sug
gestion that United States bonds can be used for normal cir
culation is no reply to the question why United States bonds
can not be used for emergency circulation when railroad bonds
are given that preferential distinction.
Seventh, the committee bill to prevent panic makes no pro
vision for forbidding national banks tying up their resources
m speculative loans, which was notoriously one of the impor
tant factors in the recent panic.
. Eighth, the committee bill to prevent panic makes no pro+nS
1°^ it0
imPr.°Per loans by active bank officers to
themsehes, which practice proved one of the well-knowm recent
contributing causes that precipitated panic in New York. Witness, the Morse banks and allied institutions.
Ninth, the committee bill to prevent panic is defective because
it does not make a proper provision for the maintenance of
31589— 7444
actual cash reserves in the manner which our present knowl
edge justifies and requires. It leaves the present fictitious re
serves uncorrected.
Tenth, the rate o f interest of 6 per cent is hardly high enough
to insure and compel prompt retirement. (Six per cent bonds
could be used without loss and inflate the currency 75 per cent
of their value without cost and with profit in some parts of the
country.) The tax on emergency currency should be progressive
and high enough to enforce its prompt contraction.
Eleventh, above all, Mr. President, the committee bill to pre
vent panic is most seriously defective because it provides no
plan o f insurance to the depositor of the national banks when
the lack o f such assurance permits the fear of the depositors
to be excited and thus engenders national panic.
In discussing these objections, Mr. President, I shall do so
w ith the greatest brevity consistent with clearness.
T
PRO PO SED
IS S U E
SH O U LD NOT BE L IM IT E D
IN
AM OU N T.
First. The first objection, Mr. President, which I make to the
committee bill is the limitation of the proposed remedy to five
hundred millions, when the chairman of theCommittee on Finance
has himself submitted figures showing that $467,000,000 of pub
lic money, clearing-house certificates, checks intended to be
used for currency, and compulsory additional bank-note circula
tion and forced gold importations were required in the effort to
control in any substantial degree the last panic.
Mr. President, the gross estimate of these issues by the chair
man is too small. There w
rere a great number of devices used
of which there is no record, and all of these remedies combined
really failed to prevent the United States having the most disas
trous panic in its history.
A greater volume than $500,000,000 was required in 3907 to
control this panic.
We ai*e now proposing a remedy which shall take the place of
clearing-house certificates, of private checks, of enforced en
largement of normal national bank note circulation, and of
forced gold importation, and when we do provide this remedy
we ought not only to make it large enough, as shown by the
volume demonstrated to have been necessary in 1907, but w
re
should remember that in another twenty years our banking
capital, if it continues wdth the same average growth in the
future which it has in the past, will be far in excess of twice
what it is now, and the proportionate demand for a remedy of
this character may on some day be more than twdce what it was
in 1907. We, therefore, should put no limit upon this remedy,
for the substantial reason that it violates sound reason and our
immediate experience to limit the remedy. The remedy itself
involves the Government in no responsibility and really pro
vides a substantial profit to the Government, just in degree as
it may be utilized. Why should we limit our water supply for
extinguishing a national financial conflagration when the water
not only costs us nothing, but will be profitable to the public
purse?
Second. The second objection I make to the bill is that it
provides that these emergency notes shall be issued under the
form and pretense o f being national-bank notes, when by sec
tions 6 and 7 of the committee bill they are unquestionably
United States notes, payable in gold or its equivalent, at the
Treasury. The plan o f the committee would require 6,600 dif
ferent plates to be used by the Bureau of Printing and Engrav
ing for the printing of these notes, and we should go through
the absurdity of calling these notes national-bank notes, when,
in point of "fact, they are really United States notes, payable
by the United States in gold, as they ought to be, and are
issued by the United States upon the security of first-class bonds
as collateral, 10 per cent in excess of the value of such notes,
and upon the further security of being a first lien on the assets
of the bank to which <iiey have been loaned by the Treasury
of the United States.
The issue o f these Treasury notes in this form is objection
able, first, for the reason that the note which pretends to be
a national-bank note is really a United States note while it
simulates the form of a national-bank note.
I do not like the pretense, and if these emergency notes are
made “ circulating notes o f national banking associations,” so
as to justify section 7 in the sweeping provision that all “ cir
culating notes of national banking associations ” shall be re
deemed in “ lawful money ” instead of exchangeable in United
States notes as provided (sec. 3, act June 20, 1874), I think the
plan is unnecessary.
I should favor section 7, without regard to the emergency
notes, because it is of the greatest importance that every dollar
which is used in our country should have the same purchasing
power in the market and should be the equivalent of our na
tional standard, the gold dollar.
But I very seriously object to the issue of these notes under a
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
pretended form o f being national-bank notes, when, in point of
fact, they are not national-bank notes, but are United States
notes.
Mr. President, I object to section 6 o f the committee bill,
which amends section 5172, for the reason that the issue of over
six thousand different forms of so-called national-bank notes
(really United States notes, redeemable in gold) does not de
pend upon the solvency or the insolvency of the bank of issue,
but depends upon abundant collateral required by law to be de
posited with the Treasury of the United States.
This cumbersome, irksome, awkward, unreasonable method
would require 6,G O varieties of engraved plates, expensive to
O
make, to keep, and to use.
It would require accounts to be kept with G,600 banks as to
their emergency circulation outstanding. It would require many
extra employees and cause large unnecessary expense.
If the emergency money consisted simply of the United States
notes, but one form of plate would be required and confusion
and expense would be avoided. The administration would be
comparatively simple and economical.
Mr. President, the reasoning of the chairman of the Commit
tee on Finance is entirely insufficient to justify any such cum
bersome method. Ilis reasoning is as follow s:
The majority of the committee were of the opinion that further issue
j Vmted States notes at this time would establish a dangerous prece
dent, and that the approval of their issue, even for temporary and lim
ited purposes, would lead ultimately to a public demand for a continual
enlargement o f the issue whenever a reasonable pretext could be found.
In other words, Mr. President, the only justification for this
cumbersome and unreasonable method is the fear that this
emergency currency, if issued as United States notes, although
the law be so drawn that such emergency notes can never be
come a part of our permanent circulation, nevertheless might
“ lead ultimately to a popular demand for a continual enlarge
ment of the issue.”
I confess, Mr. President, that I see no reason whatever to
fear that the occasional use, once in ten years, o f this emergency
currency. It never would be used as a matter o f fact. I agree
with the argument of the chairman of the Committee on
Finance in that respect, that these emergency measures hardly
ever will be used at all, because when you have the remedy
provided and safety assured, the danger would not occur, and
there would be no substantial use for any of these notes—but if
they were used once in ten years, in case o f some threatened
financial disaster, that would certainly not lead to any popular
demand for the enlargement of the issue, provided the emer
gency issue arranged in the first case is found large enough
when put to future test.
The intention should be to make it abundant enough in the
first case, and there can then be no excuse whatever to make it
more abundant. If we do make it abundant enough, then'no
enlargement is desirable by anybody.
If this were an addition to our normal circulation, there
might be force in the suggestion, but it is not an addition to our
ordinary normal circulation and will probably never be needed
hereafter at all, for the reason that the existence o f the remedy
tctll remove the fear of the people and make its actual future
use entirely unnecessary.
And there will be hundreds of these banks whose emergency
notes are printed and put in the subtreasury that will be out
of business before an emergency will ever arise again in this
country. I greatly hope that we shall not have in this century
another panic.
I believe that the sovereign right pf issuing money belongs
exclusively to the United States.
I regard the present national-bank note not as a nationalbank note, but as a United States note issued through one of its
agencies. The United States is responsible for the nationalbank note on the honor of its own bond, and, in my judgment, it
would be well to retire these national-bank notes and issue in
lieu thereof Treasury notes, payable in gold, at the option of
the holder. This is what the committee bill does in fact, be
cause it makes these notes of emergency, as well as the na
tional-bank notes now outstanding, payable “ in lawful money ”
on demand to the holder, which means legal tender, which
means gold or its substantial equivalent.
I call attention to section 7 of the committee bill, which
makes all of these outstanding notes practically redeemable
in gold. So my suggestion has no farther reach than that which
is contained in the committee measure.
Since they are to be made payable in gold by this committee
measure, why should not the United States substitute for all
these national-bank notes, now outstanding notes, Treasury
notes—payable in “ lawful money,” as provided by section 7
of the committee bill?
31589— 7444----- 2
9
It will not do to say that the country could not conveniently
absorb so large a volume of Treasury notes. It has already
absorbed precisely the same volume of national-bank notes with
out difficulty and which have not heretofore been redeemable
in “ United States notes,” but are made by the committee bill
redeemable in “ lawful ” money, which means redeemable in
money having a legal-tender quality—that is, in gold coin, in
standard silver dollars, subsidiary silver, minor coins, or in
United States notes and Treasury notes of 1SD0.
I believe that every dollar of the United States should be legal
tender, especially the gold and silver certificates, and that there
should be no evasion of this principle. The United States has
the power and credit to make every dollar used as currency
the equivalent of the gold dollar which we have made our
national standard.
We have in the United States Treasury $150,000,000 gold as
a reserve fund, but we have in addition to that over one thou
sand millions of gold and silver (on bullion basis), against
which there are outstanding gold and silver certificates.
Mr. President, I think that this reserve fund of one hundred
and. fifty millions should by statute be added to by the gradual
retirement of the gold certificates, issuing Treasury notes in lieu
of such gold certificates when they come into the Treasury, and
adding the gold thus released to the reserve fund in the division
of redemption.
The effect o f the present gold coin in the Treasury, with the
gold certificates outstanding, is to provide an enormous fund
of gold, amounting to $815,000,000, which is available for the
use o f those who wish to have gold coin.
This demand could be easily supplied through United States
notes payable in gold, and instead of $S15,000,000 gold certifi
cates there would be $815,000,000 United States notes secured
by an additional reserve fund o f $815,000,000 of gold coin. We
should then have about one thousand million of gold with which
to redeem a smaller amount of Treasury notes, and this great
fund of gold would go far to impress the nations of the world
with the financial strength and power of this Government. It
would then be an asset of our Treasury. It is now a liability.
Of course the Treasury notes outstanding would be a lia
bility also; so that after all it comes merely to a question of
form. In the present form of our gold notes, they serve a
useful purpose and practically constitute a gold buffer between
our redemption fund of $150,000,000 and any demand what
ever for gold. So the available gold in the Treasury for com
merce—the eight hundred and fifteen millions—is available
before there, is any use whatever in touching our $150,000,000
of gold reserve.
Our national bank notes outstanding would make $600,000,000
of Treasury notes additional, or a total of $1,400,000,000 Treas
ury notes, every dollar o f which is urgently needed for our
daily commerce, and which for that reason would not be pre
sented for redemption. Against these notes of $1,400,000,000
we would have in available gold about $1,000,000,000 in coin
and bullion, or 70 per cent gold reserve, nearly double the
usual reserve of the Bank o f England.
We would save
$12,000,000 a year in interest on the bonds retired.
Mr. President, I am not one of those who have the slightest
fear of the people o f the United States or of their conserva
tism. I have no fear that they will ever make the gross error
of issuing any promise to pay, whether in the form of a Treas
ury note or of a bond, which they will not be abundantly able
to pay according to the strictest letter of the contract.
I do not agree with the opinion that the so-called “ nationalbank note,” supposed to be issued by the national banks, is in
fact any grant of the sovereign power of issuing money to the
national banks. The actual issue o f these notes is in every in
stance made by the United States, and controlled by the United
States in the minutest particulars.
The United States in this national-bank note issue merely
uses the national bank in whose name the note is issued as a
medium for the issuance of the note.
If these national-bank notes were immediately withdrawn
and United States notes issued in lieu thereof, it would save
the United States and the people o f the United States the
amount of $9,000,000 annually now paid in net interest on the
bonds held iu the vaults of the Treasury for the safety of these
pretended national-bank notes. The whole plan of issuing these
national-bank notes which are now in our permanent circula
tion appears to me merely a device for giving to the 0,000
national banks a profit measured precisely by the interest on
the $000,000,000 2 per cent bonds less the one-half of 1 per cent
tax.
It might be said that this quality o f being used for the issu
ance of money raises the value of these bonds, but if the bonds
10
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
were out o f existence there would be no occasion for raising
their value.
The operation of this method of issuing national-bank notes
against United States bonds seems to me absurd. For example,
Mr. President, when the financial bill passed in 1900 if I had
been in the national banking business, and had had a capital of
$1,000,000 I could have converted my capital into national-bank
notes and thereafter I would have received from the Treasury
of the United States 1J per cent net on $1,000,000 for having
loaned my valuable money to the Treasury and issuing a similar
amount of currency in my name of the same value. This means
a net bonus of $15,000 per annum for $1,000,000 of inflation.
This system means $9,000,000 a year bonus for $600,000,000 of
inflation. This 2 per cent in the instance cited would thus
make me an income of $20,000 a year, less a tax of $5,000, which
the people of the United States are compelled to pay without
any consideration.
\\ho pays the bill, Mr. President? It is very largely the
farmer aud producer whose lack of intelligence appears to be
relied upon never to discover it nor to complain; it is the pro
ducing masses who pay this tax o f nine millions a year and this
tax is collected from them or from the proceeds of their labor
in whatever concrete form it may present itself. I do not think
this good legislation. I do not think it a necessity and I do not
believe in taxing those who are weak and ignorant for the
benefit and privilege of those who are rich and powerful.
I certainly do not believe we should enlarge the issue o f na
tional-bank notes, so called, or that the urgent necessity of
emergency currency and relief from panic should be used as a
pretext for enlarging such so-called “ national-bank currency.”
DENYING STATE B A N K S AND T R U S T C O M P A N IE S EM ERGEN CY NO TES AND
R E ST R IC T IN G N A TIO N A L B A N K S SEVERELY L IM I T S T H E VALU E OP T H E
PROPOSED REM EDY.
Third. As to the third objection which I submit to the com
mittee bill, the various limitations which it makes by restricting
the classes of banks, and the extent to which banks are per
mitted to obtain these emergency notes, I wish to call attention
to the fact that these emergency notes are better protected
than our normal national-bank currency, which the distin
guished chairman of the Committee on Finance declared to be
as good as gold.
(a) Mr. President, why should a national bank be denied
its right of protection against panic merely because it has not
50 per cent of its own notes outstanding? Does it strengthen a
bank to have a larger measure of notes outstanding than if it
had a smaller liability of this character? Evidently not.
\ hy should a national bank, furnishing the proper collateral,
\
be limited in the amount of emergency notes it is permitted to
receive in time of panic? Much less should it be penalised
for its conservatism, and punished because it has not issued
50 per cent of its capital in its own notes.
(i>) Why should a national bank, which has not 20 per cent
surplus, be denied this right of protection against panic, merely
for this reason, when such a bank is able to furnish first-class
collateral, 10 per cent in excess of the relief proposed ?
Why should it be denied emergency notes essential to its wel
fare when the relief puts the Government in no danger what
ever, and is serviceable to the Government itself to the extent
of an interest charge of 0 per cent, and when the proposed
remedy may be of the highest importance to the welfare and
safety of some industrial center, or to the safety and commer
cial stability of the United States?
There can be no good reason, Mr. President, why this relief
should be denied, and there is no good reason for any such lim
itation.
The committee will not pretend and does not pretend that
the value of these emergency notes is due to the credit of the
bank to which such notes are advanced, but the safety o f such
notes depends upon abundant collateral of first-class bonds re
quired by the Government before such notes issue.
The Government makes an actual profit from such emergency
notes, and no one will seriously contend that any loss from such
issue of emergency notes is possible.
(c) Under the committee measure, if a national bank has a
gross amount of notes, normal and emergency, equal to the
capital stock and surplus of such national bank it is then
denied any further relief in the way of emergency notes.
l o r what leason, Mr. President, is this limitation imposed’
Such a bank offers abundant collateral in first-class bonds and
makes the Government secure; and it offers the Government G
per cent profit.
The relief sought by such a bank may be of serious impor
tance to some manufacturing center; may be of serious impor
tance to the stability of the commerce and of the success aud
happiness of the business men of that immediate locality.
31589— 7444
Since the Government is safe, and since the Government will
make a profit, why should such a bank be denied its most rea
sonable demand?
Under this proposed limited remedy the great National Bank
of Commerce, of Kansas City, run to its death recently by an
unfounded suspicion, would be limited in emergency notes ob
tainable by this bank to $2,000,000 (its surplus), and yet this
same bank had on hand nearly $7,000,000 of bonds, $14,000,000
of cash, which includes accounts with other banks, of course,
and deposits o f $35,000,000. Their loans and discounts were
only about 50 per cent of their deposits, and yet they were
driven to ruin by the baseless rumor of a circular letter ques
tioning their solvency.
This magnificent institution paid out $18,000,000 before clos
ing its doors against a panic and a run that was absolutely
senseless and idiotic.
The institution, I am thoroughly satisfied, is solvent to-day,
and no question could ever have justly arisen as to its conserva
tive management, except from the envy and malice of enemies.
And yet under this bill this institution, with assets of $40,000,000, would not be allowed emergency notes on good bonds
for over $2,000,000, even if their necessities compelled them to
have $17,000,000 more to pay their depositors in full.
If it had been known that the National Bank of Commerce
could have obtained emergency notes on good bonds the depos
itors would never have made the run, because the only reason
the depositor has for drawing his money out is the fear that
he can not get money in case of his own necessity.
The bank of which I had the honor to be president ten years
withdrew from the National Bank of Commerce over $150,000
in a few days because of this terrible rumor, which was spread
broadcast by a circular letter. We knew it meant the ruin of
that bank and that we were not strong enough to sustain them
against the hurricane of panic.
I confess I was ashamed of the transfer, and yet if the de
posit referred to had remained it would have made no difference
in the result.
But, Mr. President, an opportunity is afforded me now to in
sist upon a remedy broad enough to protect a like institution in
the future against the terrible danger of panic, and I deem it a
serious duty to insist upon the fullest measure of protection,
because the welfare of the banks, the stability of our national
commerce, depends upon it. The harm done to the Southwest by
the closing of the doors of the National Bank of Commerce can
not be measured by the few millions involved in the closing of
this bank. The confidence o f the people for the future in the
stability of our institutions has been tremendously impaired by
this wreckage of what was regarded the most conservatively
managed bank in the Southwest. It avails nothing to say that
the wreckage of this bank was cunningly contrived by enemies
who wanted the deposits of this institution. The terrible fact
is, our people are thus taught to distrust the strongest, and dis
trust and suspicion are deadly enemies to our growth and devel
opment. This distrust may endanger, and does endanger, any
bank and any enterprise.
It is a deep disgrace and dishonor to this Government that
such a condition of peril should exist under our statutes, and I
shall not be a party, Mr. President, to its continuance.
Indeed, I wipe my hands of any responsibility, because eight
years ago J caused an adequate remedy to be offered to the
chairman of the Committee on Finance and to this honorable
body, and it passed unnoticed. And now that I repeat the
suggestion, as a Member on this floor, I pray the interest, the
attention, and a proper action on the part of the Senate o f the
United States.
(d) Mr. President, the committee bill puts a further limitation
upon the proposed relief. It proposes that the emergency notes
shall be issued only proportionately to certain States of the
Union. If California were in great need and the balance of the
countrv were in no need whatever, the relief afforded California
would *be equivalent to its proportionate part, although the bal
ance of the country was not in any immediate need, or about onefortieth part of five hundred millions, approximately, or about
twelve millions to meet another financial earthquake.
Mr. FLINT. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from California?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. FLINT. I will ask the Senator this question. If the
financial troubles were purely local, as the Senator mentions,
referring to my own State, would there be any difficulty in his
opinion in banks in the State of California obtaining all the
money they desired from other States of the Union, from other
financial centers?
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
Mr. OWEN. I think not.
Mr. FLINT. Then why is there any trouble about limiting
the amount to my State or any other State to the sum of $12,000,000 on the proposition that a local condition exists, as far
as the financial situation is concerned?
Mr. OWEN. I think it ought not to be limited.
Mr. FLINT. I will ask the Senator what objection there is
to limiting it when it is a local proposition. The banks can
draw money from other centers at a less rate of interest than
the G per cent required under this bill.
Mr. OWEN. You are not providing merely for local, but for
general panic. If you put a limitation upon the issue you
weaken your opportunities when you are making provision
against a general panic. You are making provision against
such a situation as we had in 1907, when, on October 2G, the
panic swept from one end o f the country to the other suddenly,
and in making provision it should be made as broad as possi
ble with no limitation to the sum of $500,000,000.
Mr. FLINT. As a panic sweeps across the country, under
this bill, as I understand it, starting with California, in each
locality they would be issuing their money until under the bill
the full $500,000,000 had been issued.
Mr. OWEN. Well, I will answer that by stating just what
has occurred recently. Here was the case. If you will observe,
the national banks and all other banks issued clearing-house
certificates, issued cashiers’ checks, and issued these various
devices to the amount of hundreds of millions for their own re
lief. These various banks resorted to that practice which w e
T
are told by the chairman of the Committee on Finance will not
be endured again; that the country will not stand it another
time—although the country will, all right. The country will
stand it and‘ will thank God that the banks violate the laws of
this country, as we all have done heretofore. When the New
York banks, the Boston banks, and the Philadelphia banks
issued clearing-house certificates, we all knew it was a viola
tion of the law, and we thank the good Lord that they had the
nerve to violate the laws as they were written; and I, for one,
commend them for it, as I would commend the suspension of
habeas corpus under sufficient public danger or a vigilance com
mittee when common sense requires it.
But in such a panic as this last, if there were to be no other
relief than this measure proposes, New York would be confined
to a hundred million dollars, a sum entirely insufficient to con
trol a panic there. When a panic starts in New York it ends
in San Francisco, and the time to stop it is when it starts. It
is precisely like a fire which starts in a block of buildings.
When the fire is starting is the time to put it out and to use
a sufficient amount of water then and there to extinguish the
conflagration, which would never be extinguished by applying
a little water at different places along the line.
Mr. FLINT. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from California?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. FLINT. The proposition as stated by the Senator from
Oklahoma I would answer by saying that, if the New York
banks had been able to issue a hundred million dollars when
the panic started, so fdr as the New York situation is con
cerned it would have been settled immediately. The next day
or the day after it followed in Pittsburg, and if Pittsburg could
have issued its proportion of money as provided in this bill it
would have stopped that panic in Pittsburg. Then it would
have crossed, as it did, to Chicago, and it would have stopped
it there. Next it would have stopped the panic in Kansas City,
and the situation would not have been that a great bank in
Kansas City would have been closed for the reason that at
the time the panic had reached Kansas City it would not only
have had the aid of the $2,000,000, but those other cities would
then have been able to respond and to send money to Kansas
City to save that bank from closing its doors, which should not
have been permitted. Then the panic would have been con
tinued from the eastern end of the country until it reached my
own State, as the Senator has said; and by that time this sum
of $500,000,000 would have been issued. As stated by the
Senator in the commencement o f his remarks, the fact that the
people of the country would know that the emergency had been
met in each one of those cities, the panic never would have
spread across the country, but it would have stopped after it
reached one or two cities.
Mr. OWEN. I am in entire sympathy with the spirit o f the
argument of the Senator from California, and I will agree with
him that California, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Missouri,
and the other States of the Union each ought to have what they
require; but I differ from him in the idea that New York ought
to be denied if she requires more than this bill provides. I
31589—7444
11
think New York ought to have all that she wants and that
nobody ought to be denied.
Mr. TILLMAN. Will the Senator from Oklahoma permit me?
The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from South Carolina?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. TILLMAN. I understood the Senator to make a vicious,
fierce, and justifiable attack upon stock gambling in New York.
Am I correct?
Mr. OWEN. I think stock gambling should be controlled.
Mr. TILLMAN. Agreeing with the Senator’s view in that, and
in urging anybody and everybody who can do so to suggest a
remedy that will be adequate, I want to ask the Senator this
question: I f his policy should be followed, of allowing New
York to have all the currency she sees fit at any time she may
say she needs it, and New York inflates the currency two or
three or five hundred millions of dollars, thereby putting prices
up, so that the stock gamblers will have an opportunity to un
load on the lambs or innocent purchasers, and New York turns
around in one night and contracts the currency by five hundred
millions, what happens then? Do not all those poor wretches
go to the devil? [Laughter.] In other words, the Senator is
arguing against his own contention. In one part of his speech
he argues admirably from my point of view, and I agree with
him entirely, and then he turns around, and in another place in
his remarks he seems to have lost sight of his previous argument.
Mr. FLINT. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from California?
Mr. OWEN. After I shall reply to the Senator from South
Carolina I will yield to the Senator from California.
Mr. FLINT. Very well.
Mr. OWEN. The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. T il l
m a n ] asked me a question and I wish to ixply to it.
In the
measure which I have proposed the national banks, which carry
the reserves of the country in New York, are forbidden to lend
that money for the making o f speculative loans in the stock ex
change. In the bill which I introduced to-day as an independent
measure the quotations of the stock exchanges, until they shall
have been approved and placed under the supervision of
proper safeguards by the Department of Commerce and Labor,
are not to be admitted to the mails.
Mr. TILLMAN. What about the telegraph?
Mr. OWEN. That is another question. We can not manage
all the earth at once. I f the quotations are under proper con
trol before entering the mail, and gambling prevented, the
telegraph is not important.
Air. TILLMAN. I know ; but the stock market quotations go
by telegraph and not by mail. Most of the speculation is done
by telegraph.
Mr. OWEN. The chief mischief is through the public press
sent by mail, but, nevertheless, for full measure, I will accept
the Senator’s amendment. But what I want to say is, that in
this proposed substitute the New York Stock Exchange can not
avail itself of the reserves of this country hereafter, as it
has done in the past, provided that the Senate and House of
Representatives give approval to this substitute I propose, which
prevents the deposits of the banks being used for gambling
purposes.
Mr. TILLMAN. But I was calling attention to the fact that
the Senator is allowing the New York banks to isue $500,000,000 in emergency currency; that it would not be emergency
at all, but it would be simply giving those buccaneers and
pirates over there the opportunity to inflate the currency ad
libitum, then suddenly collapse or contract it and run prices
up or down to suit their speculative purposes.
Mr. OWEN. If the Senator will only permit me to answer,
I will be glad to do so.
Having taken these precautionary steps to prevent the na
tional banks from using their depositors’ money for the making
of these speculative loans, I call your attention to the fact that
the New York Stock Exchange can not, for their own purposes,
expand the currency through the banks for such uses. That is
a complete answer to the suggestion which has been made by
the Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. TILLMAN. Then we will have to take the w hole bottle
T
o f your remedy at once.
Mr. OWEN. Yes. And I want you to do it. That is what
I am on this floor for.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Utah?
Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
Mr. SMOOT. I should like to ask the Senator from Okla
homa if the national banks o f New York are prevented from
12
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
making loans upon stocks which are quoted upon the stock
board in New York, where are they going to loan their money,
and how are they going to loan it in order to make interest
upon it?
Mr. OWEN. I would suggest that they lend it to those
industries of this country which are now paralyzed and dead.
Mr. SMOOT. I will say that before the panic began—and I
fully agree with the Senator as to why it was brought on—
any industry in the United States that wanted money very
easily got all it needed, and not only did the banks loan money
for such industries, but they made loans and took as security
for those loans those stocks to which the Senator now objects.
I have wondered, so long as money is to be placed in New York,
to whom tlie banks would make loans if the law should prevent
them from taking stocks as securities.
Mr. OW EN. I will suggest that they might use such funds
for the purpose of promoting commerce, and not for promoting
gambling.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President____
The \ ICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Utah?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. SMOOT. I believe the Senator has had some experience
in the banking business, and I suppose he has passed on a good
many loans that is evidently so from his remarks here to-day—
and I believe he will say that, so far as loans are concerned,
if these stocks were put up as collateral security for such loans
they would be just as safe loans as a bank could possibly make.
Does not the Senator think so?
Mr. OWEN. I will answer the Senator from Utah by saying
that undoubtedly a good stock is good collateral, and it is an
adA isable collateral for these loans where they are legitimately
made. The prohibition which I call attention to is a prohibi
tion of loans for speculative purposes.
_
SMOOT. Mr. President, I agree writh the Senator from
Oklahoma so far as speculation is concerned.
Mr. OWEN. Then you agree with me all the way through,
because that is the only contention I make.
Mr. FLINT. Mr. President____
The "VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from California?
Mr. OW EN. With pleasure.
^should like to ask the Senator from Oklahoma
whetner he simply limits his prohibition to speculation in the
stock market of Wall street, and does not limit it throughout
the country; to speculation in town lots and cattle, as such
speculation goes on in the Western States? There is just as
much speculation in stock, cattle, and town lots carried on by
means^ of loans made by the banks as there is in the city of
New York on loans made there on stocks and bonds.
Mr. OW EN. So far as this bill is concerned, I would not
propose to control the gambling at a faro table, or roulette or
any ordinary gambling device, which amuses and robs men;
but when this gambling is of a nature to cause a panic, to
paralyze the commerce of this country and destroy our business
stability, so that an honest, hardworking man is unable to
make his livelihood, it is high time to draw the line; and it is
for that purpose, and that purpose alone, that I have offered my
substitute. It is not on account of banks or bankers. I am
not considering primarily the banker or the depositor; I am
considering the men who earn their daily bread for themselves,
their wives, and their children by the sweat of their faces,
and who now walk our streets by countless thousands, having
been driven out of employment as the result o f this gambling
on Wall street.
Mi-. HOPKINS- Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Illinois?
Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
orimV
I wish to ask the Senator this question in
hlS P°sl|ion- Is it the Senator’s idea when
a, customer comes to a bank to borrow money that the bank
notdgo!n-ato
is i-0l goin^ to use it fo/sr,6 8 8 m a dufdosps?affida rit that he
for speculative n makes
Mr. OWEN I have been long in the banking business and I
will answer the Senator.
ana j.
Mr. HOPKINS. I hat is what I asked the question for
Mr. OWEN. I will answer the Senator’s question I sav
that any banker who is a prudent banker ought to know the
business of his borrower. He ought to know where that monov
is going. He ought to know that the money will be returned.
I f he knows that that money is going to be used in a culpable
business, in a dangerous transaction, in a business that is harm
ful to the country, it is his bounden duty, as a patriotic citizen
31589— 7444
in the first place and as a good banker in the second place, to
say to the borrower: “ I want to know where you are going to
use this m oney?” I wT say more, that if this bill is amended,
iil
as I think it ought to be, it will become the legal duty of the
banker to so inquire.
Mr. HOPKINS. Well, then, the Senator’s position is, that
in every instance the banker should know before he lends the
money passed over his counter to the customer what that cus
tomer is going to do with the money?
Mr. OWEN. He should know that it is not going to be used
in the gambling business.
Mr. HOPKINS. Is it the Senator’s position that the banker
should know before the money passes over the counter to the
customer that that customer is going to use it for some pur
pose which the banker thinks is a legitimate business?
Mr. OWEN. The question the Senator asks ingeniously em
braces within its scope a multitude of immaterial propositions.
[Applause in the galleries.]
The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair must admonish the
occupants of the galleries that applause is not allowed under
the rules of the Senate.
Mr. HOPKINS. A suggestion of that kind by the Senator
from Oklahoma does not answer my question at all. The
proposition I make is a clear one. The Senator has been argu
ing that this money must be used for legitimate purposes. In
order to make this perfectly clear to the Senate, I asked my
question so that we might know, and the Senator can say
whether or not that is his purpose and understanding.
Mr. OWEN. I have already answered the Senator that his
question embraces a number o f immaterial matters, because
he asked in fact whether the banker must know precisely what
is going to be done with the money, notwithstanding the fact
that under this bill, if it becomes a law, as I propose, the banker
would be required to know in fact that the money is not going
into this form of gambling. The only question he would be
concerned with under the proposed statute would be whether
or not this money was going to be used in violation o f a statute
of the United States. That is the question that will be before
him. But when the Senator asks the question whether the
banker must know precisely what is going to be done with the
money which he lends, how much the borrower is going to spend
for groceries, and how much for drink, he puts into his question
immaterial matters.
Mr. HOPKINS. Oh, Mr. President, my question does not
comprehend that at all. The question I put to the Senator
is an entirely different proposition. Suppose the customer who
goes to your bank desires to buy railroad stock through the
stock exchange in New York, would you, under your arrange
ment, decline to allow a loan if the party brought good security?
Mr. OWEN. Not at all if the customer is going to buy the
stock for investment. If he is buying it for the purpose of
gambling, I would.
Mr. HOPKINS. Suppose he was buying that stock and pay
ing for it for the purpose of a rise in the market, would you
then refuse the loan?
Mr. OWEN. Undoubtedly, when he borrows money for his
gamble on “ a rise in the market.”
Mr. HOPKINS. That is what I wanted to know\
Mr. OWEN. Well, the Senator knows. [Laughter.] That is
the very thing that the banker ought to be forbidden to do.
This thing of making the market go up and making the market
go down is the means by which this country is being robbed
continually. Take the stock market as it is now7 and as it has
been for the last seven years—and I will submit a table in the
course of my remarks showing the fluctuations in these stocks.
Take such a stock as Amalgamated Copper, which was at RIO
at one time and down to 33 at another time, used for the purpose
of being a sponge, which has its filaments extending out through
the country to every little hamlet, and coming to-----Mr. HOPKINS. Oh, no, Mr. President-----Mr. OWEN. If the Senator will wait a moment until I get
through-----Mr. HOPKINS. That does not touch the subject at all.
Mr. OWEN. I decline to be interrupted.
Mr. HOPKINS. That does not touch the subject-----Mr. OWEN. I decline to be interrupted.
The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from Oklahoma de
clines to yield.
Mr. OWEN. It is just like a huge sponge, with its filaments
extending along the telegraph wires, going to every little village,
connecting with every little bucket-shop, and persuading the
immature youth of the country, unlearned people, and women to
go in and buy a little stock on the proposed rise, inducing them
to gamble away their property, and when the market has gone
up to a high price it is then put down, down, down until
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
they are frightened out of their foolish wits, and those more
learned, richer, and more skillful and unscrupulous than they
accumulate and cash in their property, not to the extent of a
few hundred dollars, as on a horse race, but to many hundreds
of millions, and, I believe, to the extent of thousands of millions.
Mr. HOPKINS. Now, Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Illinois?
Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
Mr. HOPKINS. The Senator from Oklahoma has created a
bogeyman that has no relation whatever to my question. My
proposition was as to whether he would refuse to make a loan
to a party that desired on the stock exchange to buy stock and
hold it, or to buy Government bonds or municipal bonds or any
other kind of bonds. That is what I wanted to know. The
Senator runs off on another proposition that nobody defends.
Mr. OWEN. I am glad that nobody defends it; but I want
to say to the Senator from Illinois that there is a wonderful
number o f people who practice it.
Mr. HOPKINS. They may in Oklahoma, but it is not so in
my section of the country.
Mr. OWEN. The Senator’s observation is more humorous
than exact.
If the State of Washington needed immediate relief the limit
under this bill would be approximately about four millions;
Oregon might possibly obtain two millions; Idaho might pos
sibly obtain one million; Maine and New Hampshire or Ver
mont or Rhode Island might receive a benefit of two millions,
and the forty-six States an average o f about $11,000,000 only
obtainable through the difficulty of as many hurdles and ob
structions.
It is true that, in case States contiguous might not within a
certain time demand a similar relief, the relief may be extended
to the banks of the applicant State, but the relief against panic
in order to be effective ought to be instantaneous, just as the relief
offered a burning building should be by the instantaneous appli
cation of water; it serves but little purpose to offer water to a
building after it is fatally involved.
While the intention of this limitation of a proposed remedy to
States is evidently good, its purpose appears to be upon the
theory of giving each one o f the children a piece of pie o f the
same relative size. This conception of the equitable distribu
tion of a remedy of this character contains a very serious error,
because the principle which should control emergency currency
is the same as the principle of applying water to one of a num
ber o f burning frame buildings in a block of buildings. The
water necessary to put the fire out in the first building should
be available instantaneously, without any delay whatever.
If New York needs five hundred millions within twenty-four
hours to completely put out the fire o f panic, New York ought
to have relief to that extent and within the limit o f a single
business day.
The remedy ought not to be limited to the State, or in the
other restrictive ways suggested by the committee measure.
Is there wisdom in restricting the remedy?
Would it be justified, Mr. President, to say that a house on
fire should only receive a limited amount o f water, even if the
danger of its destruction was very great?
Would the owners o f the frame buildings in a block think it
wise to limit the water to be supplied to put out the first house
on fire, in order that they might subsequently, when the con
flagration had become enormous, have a like limited supply
which would then be ineffectual to suppress the common danger?
Mr. President, the Senator from Rhode Island, in his remarks
on February 10, 1908, described the terrible consequences of
financial panic.
And having with great force described the destructive con
sequences o f this financial conflagration from which we are just
emerging, the evil effects of which are not yet fully realized,
he advises a remedy which he demonstrates by his own remarks
to be insufficient in volume.
He paints a picture of the destructive effects o f a national
conflagration, earnestly recommends water with which to put
out the fire and to provide against future destructive fires, and
having done so, he recommends as a remedy a limited amount of
water, to be used by a limited number of firemen, and by each
one with a very small hose, in a limited way, and confines the
operations of each to a limited district.
Mr. President, the water should be abundant. Any fireman
willing to use it should be permitted to do so, and he should not
be limited in water nor in the place where he will render service
in helping to extinguish the conflagration which would other
wise easily extend itself.
The committee bill limits the amount to a total o f five hun
dred millions, when far more than five hundred millions were
31589—7444
13
necessary in the panic which has just passed. The committee
recommends that even this limited supply should only be ad
vanced as a total to certain national banks, under numerous
reactionary restrictions, when all the national banks combined
comprise only one-third of the banks of the country.
The committee recommends that even these particular na
tional banks shall be limited still further as individuals and be
advanced only a very limited amount of emergency notes.
And even these limitations are further limited so as to con
fine the remedy to the limited district of the States severally,
according to their proportionate banking capital, measured by
the national banks within that State. These emergency notes
ought to be as broad as possible, available to any and every
bank, and available in any quantity necessary, and available
in any place which requires it.
Mr. President, I earnestly call the attention of the Committee
on Finance to the inexpediency o f limiting the amount of notes
to be furnished to any national bank.
I respectfully submit that no national bank should be denied
any amount of these notes for which they furnish the required
collateral, for the obvious reason that the redress from panic
ought to be made as abundant as possible consistent with the
safety of issue.
And when these notes are secured by bonds of the first qual
ity, far in excess of the value o f the notes themselves, and the
additional but useless security of being a first lien against the
assets o f the bank is required, there can be no good reason for
withholding the amount of these thoroughly secured notes which
the threatened danger of panic may make necessary.
I regret exceedingly to see this bill omit the State banks and
the trust companies. These great financial institutions may at
some time be sadly in need o f this relief. Look at the Knicker
bocker Trust Company, with its $67,000,000 of deposits, ruined
by a run upon the institution when by a proper conservation its
condition might have been relieved and great loss to the people
avoided. The Knickerbocker Trust was like a detonating cap,
causing the explosion of a train o f powder ready to set off.
I think that the committee’s bill ought to provide that any
bank putting up the proper security might have this relief, not
for the sake of the bank, not for the sake of the depositor, but
for the sake of our national commerce, for the stability of our
country, and for the welfare of those millions of poor human
beings who depend upon this Congress for wise laws to protect
them in their quiet, simple lives of faithful, willing labor. They
can not act for themselves. They leave it to this body to care
for them, and, it seems to me, the Senate ought to feel a sense
providence, as a father would for a weak child; that we ought
to take care o f the poorer and weaker elements of our country,
doing it consistently with the principles of good government;
dealing justly also with the great financial institutions, and
never treating any of them harshly or unjustly in any degree.
I have no hostility to any of our great stock exchanges. They
have a sphere of legitimate use, but I disapprove their practices
when their practices prove dangerous to this country; and I
think that we have a right to put proper restraints upon them
so that they shall not abuse the power which they have, because
these great national banks and trust companies are the pur
veyors of credit in our country. They have in their hands the
giving and the refusing o f credit. I call your attention to the
fact that when they freely extend credit, when, for example,
they loan $100 a share on Amalgamated Copper stock, copper
goes up, and when they refuse to lend on Amalgamated Copper
stock, copper goes down. They can bull the market and they
can bear the market by their giving or refusing credits. Since
they have that power and since they have used it to the damage
and ruin of this country, it is high time that the Senate should
take proper steps to control them in a wrongful exercise of the
tremendous power which is vested in their hands.
WHY
aeb
state
n ie d
T H IS
SE C U R IT Y ?
ban ks,
REM ED Y
trust
A G A IN S T
c o m p a n ie s ,
P A N IC
WHEN
and
s a v in g s
THEY
OFFER
de
ABUNDANT
banks
Fourth. But, Mr. President, the State banks and the savings
banks and the loan and trust companies and private banks,
about 17,000 banks, have an amount of banking capital twice
as great as the national banks; their capital stock is nearly
twice as great as the national banks, and their individual
deposits are more than twice as great, and yet these enormous
financial agencies of our country are refused by this bill the
relief o f emergency circulation.
These great State organizations, with twice the deposits of
the national banks and with twice the number of individual
depositors, have only one-half of the currency kept by the na
tional banks, and therefore for this reason it is the more im
portant from a standpoint of public exigency that they should
have the right of receiving this relief against panic.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
14
It is not for the sake of State banks, trust companies, and
savings banks and private banks alone that I wish this done,
Mr. President, but it is for the credit and stability of our na
tional commerce, upon which must depend the welfare of every
man in the business of manufacturing, mining, agriculture,
transportation, or merchandise, and upon which our national
credit before the civilized world depends.
The deposits of the State, savings, private, and loan and trust
companies for the year 1907 was $8,776,755,207 (Comptroller of
the Currency, p. 35) , and the cash on hand was only $391,000,000, while the national banks, with individual deposits of
$4,319,000,000, had only $721,000,000 in cash, and owed to the
State banks and trust companies over seven hundred millions of
cash.
I insist, therefore, Mr. President, that the State banks and
trust companies and the savings banks, who shall offer the
proper collateral, shall also be allowed to receive emergency
currency, not for their sake alone but for the sake of the stabil
ity ot the commerce of the United States. These emergency
notes are abundantly secured. They pay a tax which would
make their issuance profitable to the Government, and the more
limitations you put upon this remedy the more ineffective you
make the remedy. Mr. President, there is no sound reason
whatever in limiting this relief to certain States, in the pro
portion that the capital and surplus of national banks of that
b®
aF
o e caP*tal and surplus of the national banks
of the united States; but this remedy should be applied in the
fullest measure necessary to give relief wherever the relief is
needed, and since it is always in New York that panics begin,
I am not in favor of limiting the proposed relief in the manner
indicated.
If New York should need five hundred millions of these emer
gency notes to prevent panic, to relieve a panic on Wall street,
1 am in ta\or of the issue to that extent then and there, for
the disease from which New York occasionally suffers is con
tagious as far as the Pacific coast and vitally affects Okla
homa and e\ery Western State as it does every other State in
the Union.
C jy™aa A ^ the Committee on Finance wisely points
,ka
0
out that 84o/, uuu,000 in currency, clearing-house certificates,
and checks were put in circulation for the relief of the panic,
a large pait of which was poured out in New York without
stopping that crisis, and yet, by this bill he would limit New
York to the relief of emergency notes on its proportionate
part, as proposed, to less than one hundred millions. There
is no wisdom m this limitation. It would be far better to put
af *ew
, aTl0? i uP°n the emergency notes as is practicable.
t
If New York had been furnished with abundant currency, Okla
homa would have gotten currency from her New York corre
spondent without difficulty and without cost. In fact, Okla
homa would have needed^ little currency except for the panic
and excitement in New York, the contagion o f which was in
stantly and injuriously felt.
T H E O B JE C T IO N S
MADE TO EMERGENCY CURRENCY BASED ON BONDS W I T H
OUT FORCE.
Some say that the bonds available will be held by a few
banks. The answer to this is that it is not true in the first
place, and in the second place, that it is not material who
holds the bonds, for if they are available for currency and the
currency is needed, the bonds will be found and will be avail
able wherever required.
The emergency plan, however, should provide that each bank
should carry a reasonable proportion of these bonds, available
for emergency currency.
Others, objecting, say that this plan would be to favor the
bondholders. Yes; this is possibly true; but the banks ought
to be the^ bondholders to the extent o f their necessities and
under their reasonable relation as curators of our commerce.
Ihe objection, however, is much like the man complaining,
v iio w illealtb stlould be in serious danger without a remedy,
r, “ e(ly Proposed meant compensation to the druggist
e
who kept the remedy available. The objection is idiotic.
U^ ILK 0AD b ONDS PREFERRED TO UN ITED ST A T E S BONDS.
n Jtee bill ' i f , ? ? Pr0t.e st Mr- President, against the comnrhdleJe of beinirf used as a basis to IJnited States bonds the
pu e«e ot bein0 nLuS 11 deKieS for emergency notes while
boifds.ery lmP° m ilt and
Privilege i j
to railroad
It is well known that the privilege of being used as a basis
for currency, redeemable in United States notes, given to the
2 per cent bonds of the United States, has made those bonds
worth as high as 10 per cent above par, and this privilege has
probably made those bonds easily worth 20 per cent higher than
they would be if those bonds were not available for currency
The very moment that you give this sovereign right to the
31589—7444
bonds of the railroad corporations owned by private persons
you transfer a public property of the greatest financial value
from public hands to private hands.
Mr. President, I regard this proposed legislation as injudi
cious in the highest degree.
I should almost as readily give my vote for appropriating
a given number of dollars out of the public Treasury to private
interests without consideration as to give my vote for this
transfer of public values to private interests.
Has not this country gone far enough in using the public
property for private purposes? Will the enormously rich never
be content with the skillful plunder of the people?
And shall we initiate a new method of diverting public values
to private persons?
Mr. President, I inclose a list of railroad bonds, many of
which come within the scope of this bill, and suggest that this
bill, if amended, should read on its face: “A bill appropriating
certain sums of unknown value to the following bonds held by
private persons to us unknown, but with wT
hom we are on rela
tions o f amity.”
I call attention to the great fluctuation of these bonds under
the influence o f the Stock Exchange.
Mr. NELSON. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Minnesota?
Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
Mr. NELSON. I trust the Senator will allow me to interrupt
him a moment in connection with the question propounded by
the Senator from Illinois (Mr. H opkins ) a moment ago, to read
from what ex-Secretary Gage has said on this subject. In the
hearings before the committee of the House, ex-Secretary Gage
used this language:
A borrower came to the bank and wished to make a loan. He could
not avail himself of the result of the credit if placed on the bank’s
book and availed of by his checks, which would be transferable in the
field of circulation which limited the bank’s business horizon. In such
a case circulating notes or currency could be perhaps utilized for the
borrower’s purpose, and perhaps to the advantage of the bank, and the
question always arose, “ W hat do you want to do with the proceeds
of this credit?” If the man wanted to borrow and buy securities with
the money, if he wanted to borrow and pay a note in the next town,
the bank would not issue to him its n o te s; it would not give him credit
upon its books. In short, it would not exchange its credit for his, be
cause it was easily seen that through the instrumentalities which he
would use, whether by his checks or by the notes which they would
give him, he would attack and deplete by so much the cash reserve
which supported and protected the whole line of liability. The notes
would attack the reserve situation by going strictly to the redemption
agent in New York and there be redeemed. His check would exhaust
the reserve by being collected in the next town where he gave his
check in payment for his notes.
But if it appeared, as in very many cases it did appear, that the
man wanted currency for some of the commercial or industrial uses
of life, like the payment of employees, like going up into the “ north
woods,” as we called it then, to pay men for getting timber and doing
a logging business, or going into Indiana to buy wheat, or into W is
consin for that same purpose, or into Ohio for the purchase of wool,
and all those miscellaneous purposes which go to make up the products
of industry, and start them forward to market, then by the power that
the bank had to issue its unissued notes, which might still lie unused,
the bank was glad to make that transaction, and the money (bank
notes) was available to the man if his credit was good so that the
bank was willing to take the risk.
That is the language of ex-Secretary Gage, at one time presi
dent of the First National Bank of Chicago, who says that
in all these cases they made a point of inquiring what the de
positor wanted money for. If he wanted it for legitimate com
mercial purposes, they would make him the loan; if he wanted
it for speculative purposes, they would not.
Mr. OWEN. The law of reserves requires it. The law of
reserves permits a bank to buy exchange against products going
to market, even when the reserve is down below the point re
quired by law. The statement read by the Senator from Min
nesota [Mr. N elson ! answers the objection of the Senator from
Illinois [Mr. H opkins ] most perfectly.
Mr. HOPKINS. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Illinois?
Mr. OWEN. Yes.
Mr. HOPKINS. Not an objection of mine. I was simply in
quiring as to the attitude of the Senator from Oklahoma. I
was not stating what my position was at all. I was simply
calling for information to have him develop still further his
position.
Mr. OWEN. I am very much obliged to the Senator from
Illinois.
1 call attention to the great fluctuations in the price of rail
road bonds since this bill was proposed in the Senate. It has
been said, in answer to the suggestion which I make, that the
railroad bonds ought not to be given this money value as a basis
for emergency currency, that it would not make any material
difference. I call the attention of the Senate to the fact that it
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
has made a material difference in the month of January, since
the plan of the chairman of the Finance Committee was ex
ploited. I will insert here a table of bonds, with their rise in
value during January. I will not stop to read it, but if any
Senator cares to see it the table will speak for itself.
Mr. President, since this proposition to use railroad bonds
for the basis of issuance of emergency notes has been talked
about and advocated it has had the effect o f raising the market
value of these securities, when all of such increase should
attach and belong exclusively to bonds issued by the people of
the United States for public purposes.
I inclose a list showing the rise of value o f a few of these
railroad bonds within the dates indicated.
Price in De
cember.
Price in Jan
uary.
Name of bond.
Decem Decem Janu
ber 2 . ber 31. ary 2 .
Ann Arbor first general 4’s .......
A. f.an d S. F.general 4 's.........
Atlantic Coast Line................
B. and 0. prior lien 3}’s___
Can. So. iirst 5’s ....................
Ches. and 0 . gold 6 ’s .........
C. and A. general 3’s ...
Chic., Mil. and St. P........
Chic, and N. W. consolidated 7’s . .
Chic., R. I. and Pac.:
6 ’s ........................................
General 4’s ...............
Erie,first exchange gold 4’s .
Buff., N. Y. and Erie, first 7’s ..
111. Central first general 4’s
Long Is. general consolidated 6 ’s.............
M., K. and T. first 4’s . . . , ___
Mo. Pacif. first consolidated gold 5’s ___
N. Y. Cen. and Hud. River gold mortgage 3i’s .....................................................
Lake Shore 3}’s.............................
Lake Shore and Mich. 34’s ..................
N. 5 ., Chic, and St. L. first gold 4’s . . .
No. Pacif. priorliens 4’s...............................
Reading Co., general 4’s ...........................
So. Pac. 4’s gold Cen. P a c ..........................
Wabash first gold 5’s ...................................
74
951
844
77
96J
874
924
1044
1014
73
76
964
88
111
114
904
104|
1004
704
99
114
108
924
95
1084
97
108j
94
103
110
1064
97
984
114
1034
984
964
108
86
1044
99|
64
99
884
73
87
93
98
94
78
1014
1024
110
100
111
94J
105
94
105
894
74
91
954
874
754
894
95*
FebruJanu ary 14.
ary 31.
82
89|
92
1044
1014
76
1024
1164
80
994
87}
92
1044
1014
76
103
118
112 J
1004
113
97
1004
100
100
114
114
102
102
114
974
109
114
98
109
90}
804
92
99
90}
77
92
984
1004
95
85
107
100
100
1014
954
82
1054
93
81
1054
964
87
1094
The prospect seems to have given value to all except Canadian
Southern first 5’s, which are not available.
Mr. President, I feel the greatest respect for and interest in
our transportation companies. I desire that they shall receive
the most considerate and the fairest treatment at all times, and
yet, Mr. President, I think that this Senate has no right to
give them, by legislation, values which belong alone to the
people of the United States, who have trusted this body with
temporary authority.
CO NTRACTIO N
OF N O RM AL N A TIO N A L -B A N K CU RRENCY SH O U LD
MADE U N L IM IT E D BY T H I S C O M M IT T E E B IL L .
NOT
BE
Sixth. Mr. President, I think it is unwise to allow the with
drawal of the normal bank currency without any limitation. I
think there should be at least some limitation upon the with
drawal of normal national-bank currency, and I should be
willing to nine millions per month; but I do not think, Mr.
President, it is prudent to provide unlimited contraction by this
statute, as it might bring about the same evil consequences
which are produced by the hoarding of currency, and which has
proved very disastrous in the recent panic.
I do not think, Mr. President, our normal national-bank notes
should be withdrawn without limit, as it is better for the coun
try that the currency of the United States should remain as
nearly as possible within stable equilibrium.
Let the banks give up their Federal deposits if they have too
much currency.
While our country is reacting from the terrible panic inflicted
on us by the gamblers of New York, every dollar available
should be left in circulation as a stimulus to renewed courage
and enterprise.
Contraction means falling prices, and commodities have been
falling steadily. Merchants do not buy readily on a falling
market. Factories are checked or stopped by a falling demand
and a bad market. Contraction will raise the interest rates, but
we do not need higher interest. We need lower interest, re
newed activities, sustained commodity values, so that idle men
and machinery may be got to work again. C. T. Libby well
says in regard to contraction: “ I f that policy is to be again
employed, it should be over the mangled corpses of every mer
chants' association, chamber of commerce, and board of trade
in this country.”
31589—7444
NA TIO N A L
BANKS
SH O U LD NOT BE P E R M IT T E D TO
FOR SP E C U LA TIV E LOA N S.
15
U SE
T H E IR
D E P O SIT S
Seventh. The committee bill, Mr. President, makes no provi
sion for forbidding national banks from using their depositors’
money for speculative loans.
We all know that the New York banks hold in their hands
twelve hundred millions. of deposits, including the deposits
and reserves o f the national banks and of the State banks
and of the trust companies throughout the Union from Cali
fornia to Maine.
And yet we also know that more than one-half of these
deposits put with the New York banks for reserves were tied
up and crystallized in loans for the speculative buying and
selling of stocks, while one-fourth only is held as a cash re
serve, so that the money needed, or, I should rather say, the
bankable credit needed for the transaction of our commerce
was made unavailable last fall by the loans for speculation on
the stock exchanges of New York.
The chairman o f the Committee on Finance advised the
Senate on December 18, 1907, that—
No committee can ascertain
*
*
*
“ the precise causes of any
financial crisis which has taken place in the history of this country.”
He also said:
It is the facts that we want with reference to this crisis— what
the operations of the Treasury have b een; what the operations of the
banks have been, and what other facts there are in existence that bear
upon the crisis as it actually took place.
There may be a dozen reasons why this panic occurred, which may
have no bearing upon legislation.
Mr. President, one of the reasons why this panic occurred,
xoldch does have bearing upon legislation, was the tying up
of the bank credits placed with New York for reserves, was in
making loans for the speculative buying or handling of stocks,
and they are still tied up in large measure. I call the atten
tion of the chairman o f the Committee on Finance to this
well-known fact, and invite him now to amend his bill so that
the reserves of all o f the banks o f the United States placed
in New York shall no longer be used for gambling purposes,
but shall be used only for the legitimate commerce of our
people.
The honorable Secretary of War, in speaking at Detroit,
Mich., February 13, is reported to have explained the reason
o f panic and to have said :
It is due, if students of finance are to be trusted, to the gradual
exhaustion of all the free capital held in enterprises which have not
been so profitable as it was expected they would be. Now, we must
wait, the whole world must wait, until we can earn more free capital.
The only thing, Mr. President, which we need to wait for is
to have our available reserves in New York made free capital
by withdrawing these loans from speculative purposes and to
hereafter confine the use of our national reserves placed with
the New York banks to their legitimate commercial purposes
and forbid the embarrassment of our national-bank deposits
by being employed in the notorious gambling palace called the
“ New York Stock Exchange.”
The banks of our country are in fact our national purveyors
of credits. Their depositors place with the banks certain cash
and credits, and exchange these cash credits from one indi
vidual to another by means of checks and drafts. The banks of
the United States keep their reserves in a large measure in
the form of credit placed with New York banks, and when the
New York banks tie these credits up in speculative loans and
loan out these credits for gambling purposes on the stock ex
change they divert the credits which ought to be available for
commerce and place such credits where they are capable, on
the contrary, of doing the most serious harm to the people of
the United States. It leads, as all gambling leads, to skillful
knavery by which the artful and ingenuous arrange devices
through which weaker and less intelligent people are drawn
into the game and fleeced of their property. It affords a pecu
liar field where those, who are enormously rich and powerful
already, can, by manipulation, even drag down and absorb
fortunes which elsewhere would be themselves regarded as
gigantic.
Mr. President, it was the judgment o f the moral sentiment of
the people of the United States that the Louisiana Lottery
should be suppressed. In this well-known game of chance it
had at least in its favor reasonable assurance of integrity of
management. It did not use marked cards or loaded dice,
but the distribution was made according to the element of
chance with an assured degree of fairness. In the New York
Stock Exchange manipulations, nobody pretends there is any
16
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
degree o f integrity. The most ingenious lies are circulated
as the truth for the purpose of “ bulling ” and “ bearing ”
stock.
Men are invited into contracts and the most artful and crafty
manipulations thereafter designed and executed to make their
compliance with their contracts impossible, and in that way
take from them their property under, the forms of law.
Men are induced to invest their property in stocks on a high
market and credits extended to them so that they may carry
the speculative loan, and then the credit is slowly and gradually
put through a series of reductions, not necessarily reducing the
loan, but demanding more collateral, and finally when the vic
tim or his idiotic successor has all his wealth upon the table,
credit is denied and he is compelled to deliver. The moral sen
timent of the people of the United States is against the
gambling on the stock exchange and against its similar, but not
more criminal imitator, the bucket shop, and I believe, Mr.
President, that since the gambling on the stock exchange was
undeniably a potent influence in producing panic, it should
be suppressed as far as the United States has power, and cer
tainly within the limits of this committee bill the national
banks should be forbidden to use the reserves of the people of
the United States for the promotion of the speculative buying
and selling of stocks on these exchanges,
In New York the banks are used a? convenient tools for the
most gigantic gambling the world has ever known.
The world's greatest gambling house is the New York Stock
Exchange— “ an unincorporated, irresponsible institution.”
(Creelman.)
According to James Creelman’s statistics, 2S6,41S,601 shares
of stock o f par value of $25,000,000,000, besides 065,000 of
thousand-dollar bonds, were “ sold ” in 1006 on the Stock Ex
change; and on the Consolidated Exchange 130,000,760 shares
o f stock, besides 21,569,178 shares of mining stock and 193,884,000 bushels of wheat. This does not include curb sales.
Over $30,000,000,000—four times the value o f the products of
all the farms of the United States.
I submit as Appendix C to my remarks a sketch by the New
York World, o f January 7, 1908, on this subject.
The overcertification of checks, for the convenience of the
gamblers, by the national banks is prohibited by law (section
520S), but I am advised this is evaded on a vast scale every day,
the broker getting his check certified, when he has no deposit
and no security, in order to buy the security, which is then
placed as collateral to his demand note.
I understand the law is evaded by putting up a demand note
secured by the stock named, and then before business hours
close the collateral is bought and delivered to the bank extend
ing this advance credit. This practice, being a part o f the gam
bling machinery, should be forbidden by law, because it is one
of the potent agencies by which this gambling is successfully
carried on.
Mr. President, this recent panic was undoubtedly promoted by
the speculations in stock in New York and by the great “ bull ”
movement which had been engineered through several years
and a more recent but equally great “ bear ” movement, which
resulted in the ruin o f hundreds of thousands of small financiers
and of thousands of other business people and of some financiers
who were not small.
It is a very easy thing, Mr. President, for a batik to loan
money on the security of stocks of a definite market value,
which are attractive because they are regarded as quick as
sets. This process had become a fixed practice in New York,
so that over one-half o f the deposits in New York were loaned
out to the speculative buyer of stocks; but every bank in
the United States has a deposit in New York. '*ery bank
looks to New York as a place from which it may obtain
money in time of need, every bank keeps its reserve in New
York on the implied contract that if the depositing bank
needs a credit or currency, it is entitled to demand it and to
receive it.
Obviously this implied contract is impossible o f fulfillment if
the New York bank lends over one-half of these credits to the
speculators on the stock exchange. It follows that the use of
these credits on the stock exchange really necessitates the with
drawal of such credits from the channels of trade, from the
uses o f commerce, from the service of the manufacturer, the
producing classes in agriculture and in mines, and from the
merchants and the transportation companies, and involves the
breach of the implied contract with the depositing banks of the
nation.
If these funds had not been loaned out for speculative purposes on the stock exchange, they would have been available
31589—7444
for our national commerce, where these funds properly, justly,
and wisely belong.
It was our excess of exports at last, from September to De
cember, 1907, that saved the country from a worse calamity.
(S. Doc. 208, 60th Cong., 1st sess., 16.)
Any adequate measure for the protection of this country
against future panic should forbid the national banks who op
erate under the charter of the United States from loaning the
national deposits and reserves in their hands for the specula
tive buying o f stocks, agricultural or food products.
The committee bill entirely ignores this obvious necessity.
And the chairman o f the Committee on Finance invites us
to be content with a very small measure of relief on the ground
that a small measure of relief is all that we could expect at this
time.
Mr. President, the country expects as substantial a measure
o f relief as we have the wit and patriotism to devise.
Does the chairman of the Committee on Finance think the
national banks should be allowed to crystallize our national re
serves in speculative buying on the stock exchange? Does he
think Congress will or should refuse this obvious measure of
justice to the commerce of the nation?
Does he think that the country will be content to allow the
national reserves to be withdrawn from the legitimate demands
of commerce, from the legitimate demands of the manufacturers,
producers, and merchants o f this country and for dangerous
and vicious gambling purposes?
Will he refuse this remedy against the evil condition from
which this country has just emerged? As the Senator from
Rhode Island and as chairman of the Finance Committee, does
he favor the continuance o f this monstrous evil?
The banks of New York, which in October last held a large
part of the national reserves, refused to pay currency, refused
their depositors their just demands, and, with the reserve funds
of the whole of the United States in their hands, they were com
pelled to decline the demands of their depositors, even where
the money was needed for moving the crops. Oklahoma cotton
could not be paid for and shipped to market promptly because
currency was denied on Oklahoma’s New York reserves.
Mr. President, I know that the New York banks failed in this
particular most reluctantly. I believe they did their best to
deliver themselves from the conditions in which they had placed
themselves and to deliver the country from the ruinous con
dition to which they had exposed the country by this dangerous
practice; but, Mr. President, their critical condition, their com
plete panic, was due to the fact that over one-half of the enor
mous deposits in their hands were tied up in loans for the specu
lative buying of stocks which they dared not liquidate.
If they had compelled the borrower to have sold these stocks
on the open market for cash, the stocks would have been broken
to a point which would have ruined the good name of this Re
public throughout the civilized world.
I believe the New York banks did wisely not to press their
borrowers on stocks to instant bankruptcy.
The speculative buyers of stocks and bonds, as it was, have
been pushed in many instances to the point of severe liquida
tion, to the utter ruin o f thousands of them financially and in
other ways. Many men have committed suicide because of
this panic, as did the president of the Knickerbocker Trust
Company.
But, Mr. President, the fact remains that all of these evils
have flowed directly from the loaning of the national deposits
for stock gambling, and I earnestly insist that no measure in
tended to protect this country against future panic is adequate
which fails to provide a check on the use of our national depvaita ttutl
tor tiia s^oculativa Kuying of stocks, bonds,
and agricultural products.
Even from the point of view of those who operate on the
exchanges, it is better for them to check these dangerous prac
tices and save them from themselves, for the great majority
drift ultimately to ruin, and those who succeed by successfully
appropriating by artifice the property of their fellows will
surely find but little happiness in such successes, and their
great intelligence could be made very useful in other lines of
endeavor that would promote the common good.
S T A B IL IT Y OP CO M M ERCE .
Mr. President, the most important element of our continued
national prosperity is to obtain stability of commerce. A man
engaged in business where conditions are stable can forecast
his business future. He can make definite plans. He can
foresee the results of industry, providence, and integrity.
17
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
Where conditions are unstable, industry and integrity avail
nothing, and conditions are unstable in a country where cus
tom and usage has established the giving and receiving of
credit as a necessary part of its commerce. Conditions in the
United States have proven to be less stable, perhaps, than in any
of the great civilized nations of the world, and the reason for
this is that there has been no law preserving the country from
panic and no laic establishing a proper correlation between the
banks and our commerce.
Mr. President, the first duty imposed by the charter of the
Bank of France is that which directs the governor of that bank
to see that the “ bank performs its duty to the state and toward
the commerce and industry of the country.” Moreover, the
executive officers are appointed by the political head of France,
the President o f France.” Financiers form a minority and the
members of the commercial and manufacturing classes and gov
ernment officials a majority of the board o f directors.
The banks of the United States also owe a duty to the state
and toward the commerce and industry of the United States
which the law should enable and require them to perform. It
has long been the custom of the Bank of France to let the
French people have money at the unvarying rate o f 3 per cent,
believing that stability in the rate of interest gives stability
to commercial enterprise and promotes the welfare of com
merce and industry of the country, which is the chief duty of
the Rank of France. How does this compare with the rate
of interest permitted and encouraged and established by usage,
under our national laws, by the banks of New York, which hold
our national reserves? Our ubiquitous, omniscient press adA*ses
country to-day that money on call in New York is 2
per cent, to-morrow 8 per cent on call, the next day 25 per
cent, and the next day G per cent on call, or perhaps 100 per
O
cent. The most violent and unreasonable fluctuations of inter
est are announced in the public press and sent broadcast to
every city, town, village, and hamlet in the land.
It avails nothing to say, Mr. President, that this violent fluc
tuation of interest is due to gambling on the stock exchange,
using the reserves o f the United States for this purpose. What
I wish to point out is that this violent fluctuation of interest
due to gambling disturbs the peace and confidence of the coun
try. It disturbs and makes impossible that stability in the
financial and commercial world which is essential to the peace
and prosperity of this Republic. We permit this gambling to
go on and raise no voice against it, and yet, when these gam
bling elements create a stupendous panic that shocks the world
the Treasury of the United States is called upon to throw itself
into the breach and save the country from the necessary conse
quences of this imprudent, improper, and scandalous condition
permitted by our Government. Mr. President, I do not believe
that I shall stand in the minority in this Senate in the demand
that the gambling in the reserves of the United States shall be
stopped on the stock exchanges.
*
niake no present objection to those who are fond of
gambling if they gamble with their own money and gamble with
each other, but when they gamble with my money which I have
Put m the New York banks as my reserve, for my uses, and
nhen they allure into their gambling dens the untried youth
and the ignorant adults of the country and rob them of their
property, of their peace of mind, and their self-respect, and de
stroy the stability of the commerce of this country by a panic
which their unwise and vicious conduct produces, I feel it my
duty to enter an earnest protest.
I demand, Mr. President, a statute which shall summarily
end these evil and dangerous practices.
BAN K O FFICER S SH O O ED BE R E ST RICT ED IN L OANING MONEY TO T H E M S E L V E S .
Eighth. Another one of the reasons why this panic occurred
may be found in certain New York banks where the acting bank
officers made improper loans o f money to themselves, and
although this contributing cause is well known, the committee
bill makes no provision forbidding its repetition. This is said
to have been the ruin o f the Walsh bank and kindred institutions
in Chicago and of the Morse banks and allied concerns in New
York.
Mr. President, with the example o f Chicago and the great
bank failure there, due to the unwise loan of the depositors’
funds by the active president of the bank to himself, and with a
like notable illustration in New York, it seems to me that this
cause which has contributed to disturbing confidence should be
removed. The violence of this recent panic was precipitated in
New York, when conditions were otherwise critical, principally
by the charge and belief that the active officials of certain banks
and great financial institutions had abused their positions of
trust in this respect.
31589—7444----- 3
What objection can there be to forbidding an active official
of a bank loaning himself the money trusted to his charge, ex
cept under the strictest safeguard! The reason of this, Mr.
President, is so obvious, that an objection to it w ould seem to
T
be absurd. I do not think it necessary to do more than to
mention the necessity of this action, since the fault to be cor
rected is one of the recognized contributing causes of panic.
There can be no excuse to omit this precaution.
C O M M IT T E E
B IL L
DOES
NOT REQUIRE A PROPER
BAN K RESERVES.
A D JU ST M E N T
OP
THE
Ninth. The committee bill, while at first proposing that the
national banking associations outside the reserve cities should
keep 10 per cent o f their deposits in legal money, finally struck
out this provision and failed to insert any equivalent of the
proposition requiring the banks to strengthen the interior re
serves, but does insert a provision requiring no reserve against
$250,000,000 of Government deposit, all of which ought to be
held as reserve either by the banks or by the United States
Treasury.
The chairman of the Committee on Finance argues with
great earnestness and with convincing force the absolute neces
sity of a proper cash reserve, and finally contents himself with
making no improvement whatever in our present defective
reserve system and then recommends, as an anticlimax, that no
reserve whatever shall be required on United States deposits.
I confess I do not understand the chairman of the Commit
tee on Finance. He strenuously urges the necessity of remedy
and then proposes remedies which by his own argument are
confessedly inefficient and entirely ineffective to remedy the
conditions which he is obliged to know have heretofore been
contributing causes of panic.
These interior banks had on August 22, 1007, $1S2,000,000
of cash reserve against $2,627,000,000 in deposits (Comptroller’s
Report, 1007, p. 220), less than one-half the cash they are sup
posed to carry. A 10 per cent reserve for these banks would
mean $262,000,000 instead of $182,000,000, an increase of
$SO,000,000. In increasing these reserves in lawful money it
would, of course, be measurably done at the reduction of the
reserves in the banks of the reserve cities, but this could be
done without inconvenience or harm to the reserve city
banks.
The increase of $SO,000,000 for the interior banks is some
what larger than would really be necessary, and I think the
committee was therefore justified in striking out this require
ment; but I think the committee was in serious error in mak
ing no adequate substitute provision for a proper adjustment
of the reserve, for the reason that the reserve is of extreme
importance in preventing panic.
It is easy to strengthen these reserves and to distribute them
without in"the least taxing the banks, as I shall show in detail
in discussing the substitute I shall propose.
The national banks have only seven hundred and one mil
lions of available cash, and under the laws which are more
powerful than any Congress can pass, the laws of human usage
and custom, the "laws of convenience, this amount can not be
easily increased without serious constrictions of credit.
The amount, however, can be easily redistributed under a
plan that shall not disturb the gross amount of available cur
rency, and this ought to be done as a precaution against panic
and "also with a view to using such reserves in currency for the
establishment o f the stability o f our commerce.
By reducing the cash reserve of central reserve cities to 20
per cent and requiring them to keep 5 per cent of municipal
bonds as a basis of emergency currency there would be released
about seventy-five millions of currency and make available
Sixty millions additional emergency currency.
By requiring other reserve cities to carry an actual cash re
serve o f 15 per cent it would add to their actual reserve about
twenty-nine millions cash, and 10 per cent of bonds for emer
gency" notes would make available for them one hundred and
forty-two millions additional emergency notes, if needed.
By requiring interior banks to keep 9 per cent of their re
serves in actual cash it would increase their actual cash reserves
about fifty-four millions, and 6 per cent of bonds for emergency
notes would make available for their immediate use, if needed,
the further sum of about one hundred and fifty-seven millions—
a gross amount o f three hundred and sixty-four millions of
available emergency circulation, with no increase in present re
serve required. These results would follow without adding a
dollar to the reserves now required by law, merely by requiring
“ open accounts with reserve agents ” to be put in bonds for
emergency currency, which would pay more than the interest
now paid by the reserve agent.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
18
Reserves.
[Report Comptroller of Currency, page 222—1907.
All figures in millions.]
Classification of reserve held.
Location of banks.
Central reserve cities
Other reserve cities
.National reserve cities
Amount
Num- Deposits,
ber
Reserves required,
in
in
of
required.
millions.
banks. millions.
60
S06
6,178
1,205
1,432
2,627
6,544
5,256
Per cent.
25
25
15
Ratio
held.
Classification under substitute proposed
by Owen.
Amount
held, in
Redemp
In lawful Due from
New Lawful
Total
millions. money in reserve tion fund
Rate in Amount
rate in money. bonds. in bonds. reserves.
with
bank.
agents. Treasurer cash.
301
355
394
26.2
25.5
16.9
315
362
443
311.7
190.3
199.6
165.7
226.7
3.8
6.3
17.2
1,050
21.3
1,121
701.6
392.4
27.3
Per ct.
20
15
9
240
214
236
790
Per ct.
5
10
6
60
143
157
a 300
6357
c393
360
d 1,050
” This plan in releasing sixty millions would lower the reserve required by fifteen millions more.
“ This plan releases forty-seven millions cash to the country banks and would lower the reserve required by about twelve millions.
u lus would increase cash required thirty-seven millions, supplied from reserve cities, and would increase gross interior reserves actually available by using
0 °™ sto r emergency notes, in lieu of open credits with reserve agents.
« Cross reserves the same as at present.
The fictual cash now on hand would not be added to, but
would be so distributed that our moving crops and our com
merce could be more conveniently served than under the pres
ent distribution of the available banking currency of the United
States.
This rearrangement is provided in the substitute I shall
propose.
Mr. President, the Senator from Maryland [Mr. R a y n e r ]
pointed out what was literally true with regard to the reserve
held by our country banks— that only 7.4 per cent need be
kept as cash under our present laws. This is set forth with
great care by the Comptroller of the Currency, on page 72,
Report P,)07, which I respectfully submit. This clearly demon
strates that there is but 7.4 per cent of cash really required
to be kept by the banks under the present statute against the
deposits in the country banks, and this amount leaves an insuf
ficient margin for the transaction of business whenever a crisis
occurs.
And even this narrow amount need not be kept on hand if
there be permitted the practice of double-heading or exchanging
credits between banks for the purpose of padding their accounts.
The present measure should carefully correct the weakness
of this system, for the reserves of the national banks are relied
on by the State banks and trust companies to cover deposits
twice as great. The national banks really hold the practical
reserve of seven hundred millions against the nation’s gross de
posits of about thirteen thousand millions, or a cash reserve
less than 6 per cent.
No provision is found in the committee measure providing
for this contingency, while such a precaution would seem
judicious.
The compulsory retirement of these emergency notes is of
essential importance. With the law drawn in such a manner
that the compulsory retirement is assured, there could be no
possible reason for regarding this statute as a dangerous prece
dent, even if the issue were United States notes instead of
United States notes under the form of national-bank notes, as
the chairman of the Finance Committee has suggested.
It would be no more dangerous and no more liable to cause
a public demand for a continual enlargement of the issue than
the precedent set by the clearing-house certificate, which is only
issued as an emergency measure and which is similarly taxed
and instantly retired when the need passes.
The banks of the country are opposed to the issue of clear
ing-house certificates or cashier’s checks or any other device
of this kind forced on them by a panic, and the fact that they
use such devices does not constitute a dangerous precedent and
will not ultimately lead to a demand for a “ continual enlarge
ment ” of the issue. Every bank in the country will be glad to
get back to a normal condition, and would be glad to be allowed
to stay in a normal condition.
The fact is, Mr. President, the issuance of 6,600 different
forms of national-bank notes as emergency circulation under a 6
per cent penalty would be more apt to make an unwise prece
dent than the issue of such notes as United States notes, for the
obvious reason that there would be 6,600 banks who could make
the argument that these notes which they issue are good with
C A SH RESERVE ON D E P O SIT S OF $ 1 0 ,000,000 IN IN T E R IO R B A N K S .
Table showing what the law permits to be done! icith the alleged cash out the bonds behind them and without the 6 per cent penalty.
Why should they not contend hereafter that 3 per cent would
reserve.
be sufficient or 2 per cent would be sufficient?
Deposited
The present asset currency is based upon this very contention,
Cash re
with re
Possible
Amounts
serve in
and has gathered considerable force throughout the country, and
loans.
serve
of deposits. vaults.
agents.
has great merit where safeguarded and under penalty to prevent
permanent inflation.
Country banks.............
The committee plan of inviting the issuance of these emer
$900,000 $8,500,000
310,000,000 $600,000
Reserve city banks (amounts
gency notes as bank notes is more likely to prove a bad prece
above deposited by country
banks), 9 per cent . . .
a 112,500
675,000 dent than the issue of such emergency notes as Treasury notes,
900,000 a112,500
Central reserve city banks
although no danger need be apprehended from either form.
(amount as above deposited
The committee measure, confessedly a measure to prevent
by reserve city banks)&.............
84,375
<1112,500
c28,125
panic, fails to provide that which is by far the most important
Total............................................... 11,012,500
1,012,500 9,259,375 precaution against panic. This precautionary measure is the
740,625
removal of the fear of the depositor. It is only the fear of the
84
Per cent of total deposits....................
61
9i
The soul of a panic, its great
10]
92] depositor which causes panic.
Per cent of original'deposits...............
moving force, is the fear felt by the depositor and his conse
quent hoarding of currency. I shad discuss this more fully in
° One-half of one-fourth.
connection with the substitute measure which I have had the
6 Twenty-five per cent of 9 per cent.
c One-fourth of .one-half of one-fourth of 9 per cent.
honor to submit, and shall show that this precaution will cost
Amount of cash outside original country banks, $140,625, or neither the depositor nor the Government anything; that it
would benefit both ; that it will not hurt State banks; that the
1.4 per cent.
By exchanging credits even this reserve can be diminished objections made to this precaution are entirely unsound.
PROPOSED S U B S T IT U T E .
substantially.
lentil. Mr. President, the committee measure imposes only a
The substitute which I shall move as an amendment to the
•
c+
eat penalty, and therefore if for any reason the rate of committee bill takes great pains to provide against every objec
pait of this country should rise higher than 6 tion made to the committee measure, and it contains those fea
-iT-P?e e™ersency notes might be easily made a per- tures of the committee measure which are of value.
1. It proposes United States notes (for emergency use) which
P’ + w I 1
<ldl! l0n 1° °H circulation at such a point., and the tax
,r
.n° r S Should therefore be increased pei iodically, so are by law “ legal tender.”
that then retirement shall be made compulsory.
2. It provides a method o f instant issue when the emergency
The rate o f interest on these bonds is a matter of importance, arises.
t
. ,
and no bond bearing in excess of 5 per cent should be per
3. It provides not only the issue to some national banks in a
mitted, because otherwise the penalty on the emergency notes limited way, but makes the provision against panic available to
might be insufficient for compulsory retirement
any national bank or to any State bank or to any trust com
31589— 7444
I
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
pany or savings banks which puts up the necessary security to
the Government.
4. It uses the same form of bonds as the committee measure
for collateral, to wit, “ the bonds or other interest-bearing ob
ligations of any State, city, town, county, municipality, or dis
trict legally organized which has existed ten years and never
defaulted in principal or interest of any funded debt;” but it
also provides the use of United States bonds, which is not pro
vided by the committee measure, and strikes out railroad bonds,
which are provided by the committee measure.
5. The substitute provides emergency notes in any quantity
which proves to be necessary, whereas the committee bill con
fines the issue to five hundred millions and then puts such re
strictions on it that the available issue will be extremely lim
ited at any point of original need.
6. The substitute imposes a tax of G per cent for the first four
months, 8 per cent for the succeeding months, and compul
sory retirement within twelve months. The committee bill is
content with a 6 per cent tax. The substitute forbids the use
of bonds bearing interest in excess of 5 per cent. The com
mittee measure puts no limitation on the interest a bond may
bear.
7. The substitute restrains active officers of a bank borrowing
the funds of a bank, except under safeguard. The committee
measure ignores this precaution against panic.
8. The substitute forbids the use of deposits for speculative
buying of stocks, bonds, agricultural or food products, because
this has been a potent cause of panic. The committee bill
leaves this evil in full force.
9. The substitute bill requires interior banks to have 9 per
cent cash reserves, reserve city banks to have 15 per cent cash
reserves, central reserve banks to have 20 per cent cash reserves,
and requires banks to carry bonds available for emergency
notes as a balance of the reserve now required by law. The
committee measure is content with requiring no reserve on
Federal deposits.
10. The substitute specifies that only the net favorable bal
ance of accounts with reserve agents shall be permitted as a
part of the legal reserve, a matter important in preventing
panic. Upon this question the committee bill is silent.
11. The substitute provides the insurance by the national
banks of their deposits by using the tax paid by the national
banks on their normal and emergency circulation.
This is the most important precaution against panic. The
committee measure refused this protection.
12. The substitute safeguards the State banks from injury
under the insurance plan by putting into effect the insurance
feature only after March 1, 1910, except in States having the
insurance plan for State banks, and prevents any abuse o f the
insurance plan by limiting the deposits insured to noninterestbearing deposits.
Mr. President, in discussing the essential features of the
substitute bill I shall confine myself to those features of this
bill which differ essentially from the principles laid down in
the committee measure and which have not already been
sufficiently explained. I take it for granted that the majority
of the members of the Senate are in favor of emergency cur
rency, properly secured under a penalty sufficient to compel the
contraction of such emergency currency when the exigency has
passed. I take it for granted that this body is in favor of a
sufficient quantity and quality of such emergency currency to
meet the conditions of panic sufficiently, and that the remedy
shall not be a partial remedy, but shall be drawn to meet com
pletely and completely prevent any future panic.
Waiving discussion of these recognized essentials, I shall
now point out the reasons why the substitute measure is supe
rior to the measure proposed by the committee.
T H E CO LLATERAL IS BETTER.
Ml'. President, the collateral proposed by the substitute meas
ure is better collateral.
The committee measure denies the use o f United States
bonds, and inserts in lieu thereof railroad bonds.
The substitute reverses this and strikes out railroad bonds
and inserts United States bonds.
What excuse there is for refusing to the bonds issued by the
people of the United States this quality which has great finan
cial value and giving this financial value to bonds of private
persons and private corporations I know not.
It will not do to say that the volume of bonds o f the United
States, of the States, of the cities, towns, counties, municipali
ties, and district are insufficient in volume, because that would
31589—7444
19
not be true. Their volume is abundant. It will not do to say
that these bonds, issued for public purposes, are not as good
as railroad bonds, because they are better and fluctuate far less.
It will not do to say that it is a matter of indifference
whether you prefer one or the other, because it is not a matter
of indifference. It is a matter of an important value in dol
lars and cents, measurable not in a small way, but in a large
w a y ; giving this value to the bonds issued by the people is to
give those bonds values worth hundreds of millions, giving this
function to railroad bonds will be worth hundreds of millions
to the holders of such railroad bonds.
I have already pointed out, Mr. President, the manner in
which these bonds have risen in value during the month of
January, 1908, within which the chairman of the Committee
on Finance brought in his remarkable proposition, and I insist
that the full measure o f this value shall go to the people of the
United States, and that public bonds alone shall be used; and
that these values shall not go to the railroad bondholders, and
that they shall not be used for this purpose.
It is measurably true that this value being given to railroad
bonds would go to the people of the United States; it is true
it would go to some of the people of the United States who own
these bonds; it would probably go to one person out of a thou
sand, who is a railroad bondholder, but, principally, it would
go to a very few men who are the great railroad bondholders
o f the United States, and this bill would be a bill to give them
the value in this way which ought to go to the people of the
United States in their public capacity.
I do not feel content to agree that these values should be
put in the hands o f a few individuals, even if those individuals,
inspired by generosity, or humanitarianism, or by any other
worthy motive which inspires the human heart, were willing
to give it all back before they die, as in fact they ought to do.
This country has been subjected long enough to the favor of
private interests. I think it my duty to protest against the
effect of this proposed committee measure in this regard, al
though well assured of the patriotic purpose of the remedy pro
posed. I can readily understand how the committee thought
they would enlarge the bonds available for this purpose. I can
readily understand that the committee thought the use of rail
road bonds would be entirely safe, and so they are. It is not
on account of their safety, but for the reason which I give that
I insist that the substitute measure is better than the commit
tee measure, because it uses United States bonds, which the
committee measure does not allow, and it refuses railroad
bonds, which the committee measure does allow.
U N ITE D ST A T E S NOTES ARE BETTER T H A N N A TIO N A L -B A N K N O T E S.
The committee measure prefers to use national-bank notes
as emergency currency; the substitute prefers United States
notes. Mr. President, either class of these notes are as good as
gold. Section G of the committee measure directly makes these
national-bank notes as good as gold. They are made redeem
able “ in lawful money ” at the Treasury, and section 7 further
provides that all of the national-bank notes, amounting to over
six hundred millions in our normal circulation, shall be pay
able in “ lawful money ” or equivalent of gold, changing the
present statute status of national-bank notes, which makes
them redeemable in “ United States notes.” I approve the
change.
The quality of notes in either the committee measure or the
substitute proposed is first-class, the equivalent of gold, but
the objection to the committee measure is, that it provides
for G,600 varieties o f notes, each one differing in form from the
other, each one requiring a special plate in the Bureau of En
graving, each one requiring an independent account to be kept
o f such notes, whereas the simpler, more economical method
would be to have one form o f Treasury note and one form of
engraved plate and one account to be kept of these outstanding
emergency notes in lieu of six thousand and more of these ac
counts, etc.
Another objection to these national-bank notes is that it will
encourage the future demand to lower the tax on these emer
gency notes and thus encourage enlarging the volume of these
national-bank notes, which is not desirable.
Another objection to these national-bank notes is that they
comprise a pretense.
They pretend to be national-bank notes.
The banks do not really issue these notes.
The bank officials need not sign these notes to make them
current among the people.
The Government of the United States makes this issue of
national-bank notes, controls every item and every particular
20
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
in the form, manner, use, and redemption of such pretended
national-bank notes.
I do not like the pretense.
The immediate consequences which flow from this pretense,
and which have greatly impaired the value o f the committee
measure, are as follow s:
T H E C O M M IT T E E L IM IT A T IO N S
R U IN O U S TO T H E PROPOSED R E L IE F .
The very fact that these notes are pretended to be nationalbank notes leads immediately to the proposition Tound in the
first three lines of the bill, to w it:
That no national bank which has circulating notes outstanding less
than 50 per cent of its capital stock shall be allowed to issue emer
gency notes, and no national bank which has a surplus of less than 20
per cent of the capital stock shall issue emergency notes.
If these were United States notes and were not nationalbank notes, no such reasoning would suggest itself. No such
limitations would be suggested. The limitations are very
illogical and unreasonable.
In the first case, because a national bank has been extremely
conservative and has not issued any more of its notes than the
law compels, it is penalized and denied emergency notes, which
at some time may be essential to its life.
Because the bank has carefully limited its outstanding lia
bilities and made itself more worthy of credit, it is to be denied
the relief extended to those less worthy.
The absurdity of this proposition is so manifest that a child
could see it.
And no national bank, in the second place, which has not 20
per cent surplus shall be allowed emergency notes, although it
is willing to put up a first-class collateral 10 per cent in
excess of the proposed issue. Its danger may be vital, its neces
sity compelling, and yet this bill denies them emergency notes
upon a security confessedly more than sufficient.
Will any sound reason be offered for such limitation?
Certainly the chairman of the Committee on Finance, in ex
plaining his bill, made no explanation whatever of these objec
tions which I point out.
Again, Mr. President, the committee measure forbids any
national bank to have the security against panic of this pro
posed remedy, except to the limited extent that its normal cir
culation and its emergency circulation shall not exceed the
gross amount o f its capital and surplus.
What an amazing restriction this i s !
How grossly unreasonable.
How utterly lacking in foresight.
How destructive of the purposes o f this proposed remedy
against panic.
Why, Mr. President, the demand upon, a bank in times of
panic is not measured by its capital and surplus. It is meas
ured by its deposits and the demand of its depositors.
The capital and surplus may be three millions, \ts deposits
may be thirty-five millions.
The Knickerbocker Trust Company (which was recently driven
to its death) out of its own resources paid millions before it sur
rendered. Under this bill that trust company could not have had
any relief whatever, yet it had a demand liability of its deposits
to the extent of $67,065,000. This committee measure now pro
poses a plan that would limit the extent of relief against panic
to be afforded such a bank to nothing, notwithstanding the fact
that this trust company should be prepared to put in the hands
of the Government collateral, confessedly o f the first class, far in
excess of the value of the issue, and notwithstanding the fact
that this company would, upon such gilt-edge collateral, be pay
ing the Federal Government Treasury a substantial tax of 6 per
cent for the use of such money.
What good reason can the chairman of the Committee on
Finance give to the Senate for refusing this relief against
panic to this institution, when beleaguered by the demands of
its frightened depositors, and when this institution is willing
and anxious to put up first-class collateral?
Are we trying to prevent panic?
Are we trying to afford an abundant and sufficient remedy?
Or are we merely proposing to present the shadow and deny
the substance?
But the limitations of the committee measure do not stop
denying to these national banks the reasonable relief to
winch by every canon o f reason and good sense they are en
titled, but the committee measure deliberately omits from this
measure every State bank, every trust company, every savings
bank, and every other bank in the United States.
The national banks have only one-third of the banking cap31589—7444
ital o f the United States. They have less than a third o f the
deposits of the United States, and a panic could sweep this
country and never close a national bank. The hoarding of cur
rency might come entirely through State banks.
The State banks only carry a net reserve in currency of
between 4 and 5 per cent, and they have nearly nine thousand
millions of individual deposits, and their distress for currency
may close factories and merchants’ stores and enterprises -in
numerable from Maine to California because of a lack of cur
rency, and this committee measure, which proposes a remedy
against future panic, is presented to this Senate with a denial
to these great State institutions whose welfare and whose
solvency is absolutely essential to the welfare of our national
commerce. .
I am amazed, Mr. President, at this most serious omission on
the part o f the committee bill.
In the substitute which I shall propose as an amendment, the
State banks, trust companies, and savings banks are provided
for.
But the committee measure not only denies to many national
banks any relief whatever; it not only denies to the national
banks an abundant relief by limiting the amount of currency to
the capital and surplus; it not only denies any relief whatever
to any State bank, trust company, savings bank, or other bank,
but it goes still further and says that the proposed remedy shall
be still further limited by distributing the proposed relief in a
manner—
As equitable as practicable between the various sections of the coun
try.
And that—
The Secretary of the Treasury shall not approve applications from
associations in any State in excess of the amount to which such State
would be entitled on the basis of the proportion which the unimpaired
capital and surplus of the national banking associations in such State
bears to a total amount of unimpaired capital and surplus o f the
national banking associations of the United States.
This language of “ equitable ” apportionment has a virtuous
sound, but a most dangerous and harmful meaning. What it
really means is that this proposed remedy against panic, even
if under the limitations imposed upon the several national banks
it were completely available, the average relief to the country
against panic of these emergency notes would be limited to less
than $11,(XX),000 to each State. What is the purpose of this lim
itation, and why are these emergency notes, essential as they are
to protect our country against panic, bound so readily by in
numerable limitations so as to make the relief feature ineffec
tive? This last limitation almost entirely destroys the value
of the proposed remedy.
The so-called “ equitable ” distribution of this remedy would
make the remedy itself utterly ineffective, and I commend the
reasoning of the Senator from New York [Mr. D e p e w ] in his
approval of the relief offered by the Secretary of the Treasury
to New York when he said—
He might have followed the strict letter of the law, which the
Senator has quoted, and put the $240,000,000 of Government (funds)
proportionately in each one of the G,000 banks of the country.
The
effect would have been, so far as relief is concerned, like meeting
a great fire in a great city, where property is likely to be consumed
of such value as to impair the business of the whole country, not with
the concentration of all the resources of the fire department upon the
fire and blowing up with dynamite of adjoining blocks to prevent its
spreading, as they did in San Francisco, but to distribute the fire
engines all over the city and demand them to divide the water equi
tably among the different wards. The Secretary fearlessly and wisely
says he deposited the money where it would be most effective, and the
result demonstrated the wisdom of his action.
This reasoning of the Senator from New York is sound and
it is also a forcible demonstration o f the utter inefficiency of
the limitations proposed by the Senator from Rhode Island.
Under the provisions o f this proposed remedy the State of
New York, which in the last panic needed more than four
hundred millions to stop the panic, would be allowed to receive
under this bill less than one hundred millions. The chairman
of the Committee on Finance takes some pains to advise the
banks of the country that the suspension of bank payments
with its resulting strain upon the credit of the country will not
again be tolerated, and he says with great force that “ the fail
ure of the bank to meet its demand obligations is a violation of
every law governing its conduct ” and existence, and that
“ bank managers should realize that a repetition of these viola
tions will not be permitted,” and having thus given a solemn
warning to the bank managers that they shall not hereafter re
lieve their own distresses by their own devices, he offers as an
abundant remedy an emergency circulation which he so limits
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
and surrounds with conditions that its future failure to relieve
the bankers is made reasonably certain.
It looks to me this bill will prove an amesthetic to prepare us
for a future operation, a future bear raid on the commerce and
industries of the nation.
We have just had what the farmers call a “ hog-killing”
time, and somebody has canned the lard. The physical pi'operties of the country still remain, but the change of ownership
from weak hands to strong hands is obvious to any man who is
not feeble minded.
The chairman of the Committee on Finance himself advises
us in his speech upon this question of the extraordinary steps
which were taken to avoid final disaster, and which did not
avoid final disaster. He points out the deposit of public money
in New York and other banks between September 30 and Decem
ber 7 to the extent of $70,000,000.
Second. Of clearing-house certificates, $100,000,000.
Third. Of checks intended for currency, $75,000,000.
Fourth. A forced enlargement of bank-note circulation from
October 1 to January 1, $94,759,115.
Fifth. Gold importations of $107,000,000 (the exclusive prod
uct of our cotton and wheat), and he fails to count over two
hundred millions which were bought by a 4 per cent commission
bringing hoarded currency into new circulation; he fails to
count innumerable devices throughout the country which are
not a matter of record by which currency was brought from
hiding.
And he fails to point out that every dollar drawn from hiding
by the taxing power of the United States was instantly re
deposited in circulation. He fails to point out that there was
two hundred millions of public funds placed with national-bank
depositors to assist in this critical demand for currency through
which the country was being forced in 1907.
And he fails to mention the effort made by the President and
Secretary of the Treasury to reestablish public confidence by
the offer to the country of one hundred millions of 3 per cent
clearing-house certificates, and fifty millions of Panama bonds,
which had a hypnotic effect upon the country favorable to confi
dence and which helped to abate the terrible panic under which
the country was staggering.
I pause, Mr. President, in my remarks, to say that I feel it
my duty to commend the President of the United States, and
the Secretary of the Treasury, in offering at this critical period
the 3 per cent certificates and the Panama bonds.
I do not care to debate the question of whether the offer was
justified under the strict construction of the law, waiving that
point and granting, for the sake of argument, that the offer was
not thoroughly justified under the strictest construction of the
statute, nevertheless the emergency o f this panic, in my judg
ment, justified the President in this effort to relieve the country
from its danger. If I had been invited to express an opinion
before this offer was made I should not have failed to recom
mend it, and having been the beneficiary of the action o f the
Executive I am not willing to be silent and to withhold my
commendation of the executive act.
I trust that the legislation now being framed shall be drawn
in such a manner as to make it unnecessary from this time forwaid e\ ei to resort to similar measures for the relief of panic.
More than a thousand million was needed to control the last
panic and then it was not effectively controlled.
But under the remedy now offered us by the committee meas
ure, the storm center— New York—would receive less than
one hundred million.
^ r* President, our banking capital has grown in seventeen
years 23(> per cent, and in seventeen years more it will be as
much greater by 236 per cent of the present banking capital
This bill is drawn not for to-day; it is drawn for the future and
no limitation of $250,000,000, as first proposed by the chairman
of the I inance Committee, nor $o00,000,000, as now reported bv
the committee, will be adequate in ten years, even if it were
adequate now.
The committee measure is fatally defective in putting this
limitation of volume on these emergency notes. The substitute
I shall offer, Mr. President, puts no limitation upon the emerg
ency notes proposed except found in the words, “ this act
shall not be construed to limit the issue o f such notes if* in
the opinion of the Secretary of the Treasury an emergency
exists for a larger issue than the amount required to be pre
pared by this act.”
D E P O SIT S
AND
RESERVES
SH O U LD NOT
PU RPO SES.
BE
USED
FOB
SP E C U LA TIV E
Sixth. The substitute is superior to the committee measure
because it forbids the use of the national reserves held as de31589—7444
21
posits in the national banks to be loaned for the speculative
buying o f stocks or bonds, agricultural or food products. The
committee measure is confessedly drawn to prevent panic.
One of the most potent causes of panic is the loaning of the
national reserves and deposits sent to New York for the specu
lative buying of stocks.
Such loans, while supposed to be quick assets, are in point of
fact not quick assets. Every bank and trust company in the
United States keeps a balance in New York upon which they
rely for cash and which is always available for cash except
in time of panic, but when panic ensues and the depositors of
the New York banks begin to hoard money, these reserves in
New York are no longer available for cash. Nor can the
national banks which are making loans for the speculative
buying o f stocks force such speculative borrowers to pay cash at
such a season. If they do, they make the panic still worse,
and by beating down the prices of stock through such forced
liquidation they increase the alarm throughout the whole of the
United States. These stock quotations are printed on the pages
of tens of millions o f daily papers, and these quotations go to
every city, town, and hamlet in the land. If the New York
banks compelled liquidation of the five hundred million they
had loaned out on these stocks last fall, it would have broken
stocks to a point which would have alarmed the country most
seriously. The attempted remedy would have been worse than
the disease. As it was, the contraction of credits by the banks
in the reserve cities was largely responsible for the fall in the
price of stocks, and there are more ways to contract credits
than by refusing a loan.
The contraction of credit, which caused the great “ bear ”
market, was in refusing to loan as much money on stocks,
from time to time, as had been previously loaned on such
stocks.
All the banks had to do to cause a “ bear ” movement and the
lowering of the prices of stocks was to withdraw the extension
of credit to such stocks on the higher value and assume a lower
value as a basis of loans; to ask more collateral in stocks on
maturing loans. If a bank says I will lend you money on Amal
gamated Copper with a 20 per cent margin, estimating Amalga
mated Copper at 120, the stock would be affected by this exten
sion of credit. If the banks were unanimous in refusing to
recognize Amalgamated Copper as worth more than 110, its
market value would fall to that point. If they were unanimous
in refusing to recognize the value o f that stock as in excess of
60 on making loans, its price would fall to 60, because these
prices are fixed in the speculative markets and the banks fix the
measure of the value o f such stocks handled on the stock ex
change by limiting the loans on such stocks. I regard the opera
tion of this financial policy as certain in its operation as the
law o f gravity.
A community o f interest among the New York banks, con
certed action in credit extensions, could establish through the
stock exchange the most powerful Money and Credit Trust on
earth.
But I call the attention o f the Senate to the tremendous fluc
tuations in the prices of these stocks. Amalgamated Copper
about a year ago was worth over 100 per cent of what it is
to-day, and was so recognized by the banks as a basis for loans.
The game of finance on Wall street is a great game and the mas
ters o f finance can control and direct the prices of stocks with
reasonable precision. It is no idle figure of speech to speak of
the speculative class who enter Wall street from the outside
as “ lambs.” They go to their ruin and their property is ap
propriated by men o f higher intellectual force and greater finan
cial power.
The people are induced to buy these stocks and then are in
duced to sell these stocks by representations made to them
with diabolic skill and ingenuity, persuading them in the first
case o f the great value of the stock and persuading them in the
second place that the stock may lose all of its value and is
too dangerous to retain. In this way the gamblers on the
stock exchange continually steal the property of the ignorant
and thoughtless, through the gambling passion, but what
is infinitely more serious they unsettle the stability of our
commerce and prepare us for panic with its deadly national
blight.
A few o f the conspicuous samples of the high and low prices
I submit, and full tables I submit as Appendices F and G to
my remarks.
These ranges are since 1900, and will be found in the New
York Times Weekly National Quotation Review, page 13, of
October 21, 1907:
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
H ig h .
Adams Express_________ _____________
Alice Chalmers Oo_____________
Amalgamated Copper____ I
American Beet Sugar Co______
American Cotton Oil_________
American Express____ ”
_
American Grass Twine___
American Hide and Leather.._IHI~III
American Ice Securities___
_ ”
American Linseed Co____
American Snuff Co___ ...
American Steel Foundries.il "I
American Woolen Co_______ IIIIHIIII
Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe _.
Baltimore and Ohio________________ II
Delaware, Lackawanna and Western
Denver and Rio Grande___
Duluth, South Shore and Atlantic....
General Electric______________________
Great Northern preferred______
Iowa Central_________________ IT-IIII!'
Kanawha and Michigan______ ..HL-ILII
Kansas City Southern____________ _”I"
Knickerbocker lee________________ _
Lake Erie and Western__________
Manhattan Beach____________ IIIIIT'"
Missouri, Kansas and Texas Rl R_.II
National Biscuit Co_______
New York, Chicago and St. Louis".’ "
New Y'ork Central___________________
Norfolk and Western________________
Northern Pacific______________ I ..I ..I "
Northern Central________________ IH~
Ontario Mining__________________
Pennsylvania Railroad___ IIII.IIIIIII
Peoria and Eastern___________________
Pere Marquette_______________________
Pullman Co_______________________ ™ I
Reading___________________________ HI"
Tennessee Coal and Iron_____________
.United Railways Investment_________
United States Cast Iron_____________
United States Express_________
United States Leather________ “ "H I
United States Steel_______
315
27
130
36
57
272
62
13
94
30
250
18
48
no
125
560
53
24
334
348
57
76
39
85
76
22
43
86
76
174
97
700
250
13
170
50
106
268
164
166
98
53
160
20
55
Low .
114
4
33
9
24
142
3
2
20
5
26
3
7
18
55
171
16
4
109
140
11
10
7
8
12
4
9
23
11
99
22
45
150
1
no
5
20
148
15
25
9
6
45
6
8
Here these values are shown to fluctuate from the low to the
high, not by ordinary percentages—5 per cent, 10 per cent, or
20 per cent—but by 100 per cent, by 500 per cent, by 1,000 per
cent.
And yet these gamblers raise a howl of lamentation if any
body proposes to make stable these values, and appeal to high
heaven in the name of the widows and orphans whose last
dollar is invested in these precious securities.
Take the Adams Express Company. The high price of the
Adams Express Company stock since 1900 was 315 and the low
price 114. Amalgamated Copper, 130 the high price and 33 the
low price, a stock involving millions upon millions, and which
has been used to steal away millions of dollars from the unsus
pecting ignorant classes of this country, and these ignorant
classes embrace educated men who, although they seem to be
educated, are still ignorant of these refined, insidious processes
that are so diabolical and so crafty that only one man in a
million can see through them; and so this old, old game of
stealing the property of the unwary goes on year after year
and year after year and this body sits here, and sits, and sits,
supine, and offers no relief. The country expects relief, and as
one of the members of this body I demand relief. This bill must
be amended. It must provide that this process of stealage and
panic shall stop. The people of the United States have a right
to make this request. They expect it of this body, and, in their
name, the Senator from Oklahoma demands it.
The point I wish to call attention to, however, Sir. President,
is the fact that the national banks are used as agamies for car
rying on these gambling transactions on the stock exchange.
It is, as I have said, the most stupendous gambling palace on
the face of the earth, where the intelligence of the victim is
drugged and loaded dice and trapdoors prevail. They sold, or
pretended to sell, values during the last year o f over thirty
thousand millions, an average of over one hundred millions a
day for every business day in the year. They used for this pur
pose, on a margin of about 10 per cent, nearly all of the re
serves placed on deposit in New York by the banks of this
country, and when the critical time came that our national com
merce called upon their banks of deposit from Maine to Cali
fornia for the currency necessary to transact the business of
our national commerce, the New York banks, who had been
engaged in promoting these gambling transactions lor profit, and
who had by their own tactics caused a gradual reduction in the
values of stocks from the beginning of the “ bear” movement
31589—7444
until its culmination in panic, were unable to respond to their
contracts with their correspondent banks. They were unable
to pay currency because their own conduct in promoting the
great gambling scheme of the stock exchange, which culminated
in the panic, frightened the people of the country who had their
personal deposits in the banks, and a sudden withdrawal for
hoarding took place in New York, tying up within a week an
enormous amount of currency. Whether this was promoted by
certain “ wealthy malefactors,” who helped engineer such a
scheme and at the critical moment withdrew currency for the
purpose of promoting panic, is not material. The point I
wish to emphasize is that the use of these reserve funds, on
deposit with the New York banks for loans in the speculative
market, was one of the direct causes of this recent panic.
The committee measure is avowedly for the purpose of pre
venting panic.
The most notorious cause of panic are these gambling opera
tions which have threatened the country by the steady con
traction of the market price of stocks. The committee measure
ignores the chief cause.
The substitute measure is superior to the committee bill
because it removes this potential cause of panic.
WHAT
IS A LOAN FOB SP E C U LA TIV E
PURPOSES?
Mr. President, I have been challenged with the inquiry, What
is a loan for speculative purposes?
Mr. President, this question is asked by a lawyer and might
be debated by a sophist. It might be asked by one used to
critical analysis of language; by one who might plead that any
action in life is speculative; that whether we shall arise in the
morning or be found dead is speculative; that any business
transaction which is not absolutely concluded is speculative,
because any exigence which might arise that would remove
the issue from the domain of certainty contains an element
of uncertainty and of speculation.
In answer to all of this refinement, I say bluntly and
plainly that a loan for the speculative buying of stock is as
easily ascertained and determined by a competent banker or
competent bank examiner as the color of a black horse by a
person with two good eyes.
The effect o f this proposed statute would be to put the seal of
condemnation on the practice o f using our national-bank reserves
deposited in New York, for gambling purposes to the denial of
the legitimate uses of our commerce. A bank examiner who
does his duty will speedily point out to the banker who is so
obtuse as not to see, or to him who does not wish to see, what
is a loan for the speculative buying of stocks, bonds, agricultural
or food products.
I insist upon it that this measure which is intended to prevent
panic should not close its eyes to the most important contribu
ting cause of panic.
A C T IV E
BA N K
O FF ICER S
FORBIDDEN
TO
BORROW.
Seventh. The substitute measure is superior to the commit
tee measure because it removes another potent cause of panic.
It is well known that the action of Morse in borrowing the
money intrusted to his keeping for his own uses, in 1907, was
the spark which ignited the inflammable material prepared by
the gambling transactions above referred to. The powder and
dynamite were carefully arranged and Morse was the detona
ting cap that produced explosion. His property, I am informed,
has passed into the hands of those abler and wiser than he,
and in the same way the United States Steel has taken over
the Tennessee Coal and Iron, and we see the pleasant spectacle
of the survival of the fittest, a new instance of the lion and the
lamb lying down together.
The substitute provides that non-interest-bearing deposits in
national banks shall be guaranteed out of the tax paid by the
national banks on their present circulation and by the pro
posed tax on emergency circulation.
As I have heretofore pointed out, the tax on the annual cir
culation is over three millions per annum, and the average loss
to depositors of national banks during the last nine years is
$85,000 per annum.
There would be no need for so large a guaranty fund ex
cept for its moral effect. There is no harm in making it so
abundant that confidence in the fund should be assured. There
might be harm if the fund were not large enough to thoroughly
establish public confidence.
As I have already pointed out, the fear of the depositor is
the real cause of hoarding money on a large scale by the
people. I f you remove the cause for this hoarding, there will
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD'.
be no panic capable of seriously harming our national com
merce.
. When the depositor is absolutely assured in the security of
his deposit, regardless of the solvency of the bank, he has no
reason whatever to withdraw his funds, and he has no reason
to hoard it.
There is a class of persons who do not keep any bank account
because of their distrust. One of the strongest benefits arising
from the guaranty of deposits would be to bring out the cur
rency hoarded by this class of people, who at present do not
keep any bank account.
The insurance plan would bring into activity a considerable
volume of money which is now hidden.
But the value of the insurance plan is not the protection of
the depositor; it is the protection of the public; it is the pro
tection of our commerce; it is the promotion of the stability of
business conditions which is specially to be desired. The de
positor is perfectly safe now, but nevertheless when he takes
fright and withdraws currency for hoarding and produces a
panic he is very dangerous to our commerce, and it is this
danger which should be abated.
I have received a vast number of letters from bankers with
regard to the insurance of deposits. The great majority of
these letters strongly favor the guaranty plan and give abun
dant reason therefor. I submit a sample of these letters
(Appendix “ E ” ), but I have also received various letters
from bankers opposing the idea of the guaranty of deposits.
I have carefully read the letters which oppose this proposi
tion and have scrutinized every objection made.
The first objection is that it will promote reckless banking,
which will encourage unscrupulous bankers to offer high inter
est for deposits, with a view to embezzling the funds of the
depositors; that this would be at the expense of the honest
bankers of the country. The answer to this is—
First. That interest-bearing deposits are not insured and,
therefore, the entire objection fails because the supposititious
embezzler has no inducement to offer for deposits, and, more
over, the honest banker pays nothing more under the plan pro
posed than he does now. It costs him nothing.
Second. In the second place, the embezzlement of funds is
made sufficiently unattractive by the criminal code to prevent
the predicted embezzlement.
Third. In the third place, the safeguards of national banks
are otherwise abundant to prevent embezzlement, and with
6,600 of such banks in the United States the losses for the last
nine years has been a negligible quantity. The persons who
invest their money in a national bank are subject to a double
liability, so that the stockholders of a national bank of the
smallest kind put up $25,000 and are liable to a like amount
under the law before any harm can come to the depositor.
This equals a $50,000 bond to secure fidelity.
No bank can start with any prospect of success that has not
a board of local directors favorably known to the community,
who comprise a further safeguard.
There is no force whatever in this objection.
Another objection which is offered is that it puts a conserva
tive banker on a par with a reckless banker who will offer
special privileges in exchange for deposits.
The answer to this is : He is not allowed to insure an interestbearing account; the depositor is protected by double liability
of the bank’s stockholders, and that the depositors are perfectly
safe now, as a matter of fact, and there would be no more force
in the objection under the new condition of insurance than
there is under the present condition of no insurance.
But everybody familiar with the banking business knows that
the primary condition of a deposit is the belief o f the depositor
that the bank is safe. The real factors which control the de
posit are the personal friendship of the depositor for the bank,
for some o f its officers or directors or stockholders; the fact
that it is convenient to his business; the fact that he has a
right to expect the reasonable business accommodations to which
he is entitled. These are the motives which control deposits.
The question of the security of the deposit does not control
it except in a negative way. A man would not deposit where he
had doubt; and if a bank were in the hands o f a reckless, ex
travagant man, the common people can be relied on to find that
out, and no such man can attract deposits against a man more
honorable and more worthy of trust.
Another objection which is made is that it will do great harm
to the State banks, because the State banks will not have a like
insurance.
The answer to this is that the national banks for the last nine
years have lost their depositors relatively only about $1 where
the State banks have lost their depositors $23. The average loss
of the State banks has been about $4,000,000 per annum, and
31589—7444
23
the average loss of the national banks has been about $85,000
per year for the last nine years.
Notwithstanding this greater safety of the national banks the
State banks have twice as much in deposits. This further dis
credits the theory of the objection.
It is not true therefore that greater security of the national bank
depositor would break up the State banks. I think it is true
that where a small State bank in a town has a small national
bank as its rival, under the guaranty plan, it would weaken to
some extent the deposits of the State bank, especially in time
of panic, if there should ever be a panic under this improved
system and in the event that the State did not arrange in
surance for the State bank depositors.
But this difficulty has been obviated by putting the insurance
plan into effect only after two years shall have passed, to wit,
March 1, 1910, except in States where the deposits of State
banks have insurance. Within these two yeax-s every State can
adopt a like precaution for the benefit of the State banks, and
no friend of the State banks needs to be afraid that the State
banks will not look after their own interest in this respect.
It is highly desirable and of great national importance that
every State in the Union should promptly pass a State law pro
viding an insurance plan for the depositors of State banks, and
the insurance of the deposits of national banks in the pending
measure would lead directly to this desirable consummation.
Even if any State failed to provide an insurance plan, any
State bank which felt the slightest harm from the State's omis
sion could take out a national-bank charter, and thus be de
fended from any loss o f deposits from this source.
It should always be kept in mind that it is not the welfare
of the bank, nor the welfare of the depositor which is the main
object to be attained, but it is the prevention of panic, the pro
tection of our commerce, the stability of business conditions,
and the maintenance in active operation of the productive
energies of the nation, which is the question of vital importance.
T H E RESERVES AFFECTED BY S T O C K G AM B LIN G -----PROTECTED BY SU B ST IT U T E
MEASURE.
Mr. President, the reserves of the State banks, and trust
companies is about three hundred and ninety millions, against
eighty-seven hundred millions of deposits—less than 5 per
cent.
The national banks have really available less than seven
hundred millions, against a gross deposit of over six thou
sand millions, and the national banks owe the State banks
more money than they have in cash, including all their reserves.
The daily checks drawn against the reserves of all the banks
in the United States is equal to at least $2,000,000,000 a day,
nearly twice as much as the total amount of all the cash in all
the banks. About 5 per cent of these checks are handled in
cash, making nearly one hundred millions of cash a day.
These reserves would, nevertheless, be abundant if the coun
try had assurances of peace from the gamblers of the stock ex
changes.
It should be remembered, Mr. President, that the gamblers
on the stock exchange are composed of two classes—the bulls
and the bears. It is the business of the bear operator to de
stroy confidence, to break down values, and his resourcefulness
in tins respect is wonderful.
He uses every power of the public press.
He circularizes the public.
He uses the agencies of the press of every kind and fills the
country with suggestions of panic and disaster. He is backed
by unlimited wealth, and there is the most substantial reason to
believe that he has been backed during the last eighteen months
by the wealthiest men in the world, who, not content with for
tunes so vast as to be incomprehensible to themselves, have
desired to break the stock market for the pui-pose of using their
hoarded currency and hoai’ded and available cash credits for
the appropriation of the stocks and properties held by weaker
men. I slnfll not stop to criticise the moral aspect of this mat
ter. I only desire to emphasize the fact that these bear op
erators are able to cause violent fluctuations of credit, violent
fluctuations of interest l-ates; that they set out false signals
to produce shipwreck for their own profit. It is to stop the
disasti’ous i-esults of their campaigning and to stop their pro
motion of panic conditions that I earnestly insist upon the
remedies proposed in the substitute bill.
First. To prevent the use of national-bank deposits for
stock-gambling purposes.
Second. To redistribute the reserves, to withdraw from the
central reserve cities a portion o f the national reserves actually
required for the use of our commerce, to strengthen the re
serves o f all the banks by bonds suitable for emergency notes.
24
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD,
Third. Chief of all, to provide an insurance plan that will
prevent any attack on “ confidence ” being successfully em
ployed by bear operators against the bank depositor.
hourth. To provide emergency notes, properly secured, in
volume great enough to meet any contingency whatever, and to
have such issue taxed in a sum high enough to compel the retire
ment of such notes when the emergency passes.
\ hen we shall have made panic impossible in this country
V
our great Republic will move forward with a stupendous com
mercial development that will be the astonishment o f the world.
Our resoux-ces are infinite, our people the most intelligent,
31589—7444
o
inventive, and active in the world. The measure which is now
before this body is the most important bill which has come be
fore the Senate for many years. The great variety of opinions
entertained proves beyond doubt the fact that our statesmen
do not well understand the problem. But they have the in
telligence and patriotism necessary, and should employ the
patient industry requisite to its complete mastery, so that this
measure when passed shall be perfect. I entertain a profound
hope that this question shall be studied in a manner entirely
free from all prejudice and with an earnest desire to promote
the common welfare of our beloved country.
AN N IVER SAR Y OF THE BIRTH OF
T H O M A S JEFFERSON
ADDRESS
OF
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
OF O K L A H O M A
DELIVERED IN NEW YORK CITY
APRIL 13, J908
;s u
klahfl
e;
k ha<
ould t]
t a tj
housr
lersta
ny bag
t near
arly \
neasdj
terger
to H
tee. !
I S ta ;
ies srr,
ergen
A
i
;lahoDt
t
repex
ey on/
®
|
|
ks, ar ;
ificien'
uota.i
irougi,
l
ial, t l
zh h
st(
igainsH
o f sat,
•plus x
issue^
my bt,
Stater,
ds fO
|.
State^
ig art,
> the,
i*
in tbf
int ofc
any1
*
f tlie_
o
jvadeh
nitedy
>nds?l
ianksv
iding
“ mj't2
s an
ught”
*POSG»<;
! tbe=
tber
i for
that
IgM
r
ADDRESS
OF
HON.
ROBERT
L.
OWEN.
AN ADDHESS BY ROBERT L. O W EN IN NE W YO RK ON T H E A N N IVER SARY OF
T H E B IR T H D A Y OF T H O M A S JE F F E R SO N , A P R IL
Mr.
P
r e s id e n t
and
G
entlem en
of
th e
13, 1908.
N a t io n a l
D
e m o c r a t ic
C lub : It has been one hundred and sixty-five years since the birth of
Thomas Jefferson— the patron saint of the Democracy.
In the cen
turies to come the dignity and the value of this great intelligence and
of this great heart will rise higher and higher in the estimation of
man, for the birth of no man since the birth of Christ has been so serv
iceable to his fellow-men.
W e do well annually to assemble and burn incense on the altar in
his memory— the man who taught religious liberty and the first to
write it in the statutes of V irgin ia; the man who taught freedom of
speech ; who put an end to entailed estates, overthrew the law of primo
geniture, and in 1777 introduced in the Virginia assembly the first
bill providing universal education and the first bill to forbid dueling;
who established the University of Virginia ; the man who condemned
monopoly and slavery, and pointed out their dangerous tendencies ; the
man, above all other things, who loved his fellow-men and trusted them,
and regarded them as his brothers and worthy to govern them selves;
the man who stood firmly for a strict construction of the Constitu
tion, who maintained the reserved rights of the States and of the peo
ple of the S ta te s; a man whose ideas of government were so sound and
so true that within a few short years his doctrines— opposition to slavery
excepted— were established in the hearts and minds of all of the people
of the United States, so that there was in effect only one party in the
decade following his presidency.
OKLAH OM A.
You Eastern sons of the National Democracy may fancy that Okla
homa is a long way off and has but few ties with Thomas Jefferson, but
I call your attention to the fact that the purest Jeffersonian democracy
upon the continent is in the heart of Oklahoma— all of the teachings
of Thomas Jefferson are vitally active in the constitution of Oklahoma.
Oklahoma is more indebted to Thomas Jefferson than is New York, be
cause Thomas Jefferson, in the Louisiana Purchase, acquired by pur
chase the very soil of Oklahoma, and made many republics where one
empire had controlled. The people who first settled Oklahoma carried
with them the liveliest memories of Thomas Jefferson. Among the first
settlers of Oklahoma was my Indian grandfather, a leader of the
Cherokees, who carried with him as a precious memory a silver medal,
which I now show you, given to him by Thomas Jefferson. On the one
Side is a medallion of Jefferson and the inscription, “ Th. Jefferson, Pres
ident of the U. S., A. D. 1801,” and on the other side, embossed, are
two hands in friendly grasp, with the legend “ Peace and friendship.”
51007— 9315
3
4
In the most beautiful part of the Cherokee Nation I have a country
place named for the residence of Thomas Jefferson, and called Monticello. A t this country place the great-great-granddaughter of Thomas
Jefferson gave birth to two of his descendants, Adalaide and Pattia
Morris.
Oklahoma has many ties binding that great Commonwealth to Thomas
Jefferson, but chief of all are the intellectual and spiritual ties, drawn
from the soul of Thomas Jefferson, establishing great principles of gov
ernment necessary to the welfare and the happiness of man.
R E L IG IO U S
FREED O M .
The great doctrine of religious freedom taught by Jefferson is found
recorded in the Oklahoma bill of rights, section 5 :
“ Sec. 5. No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, ap
plied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or
support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion, or for
the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other
religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian institution as such.”
The right of free speech is written in the same bill o f rights, section
22, as fo llo w s:
“ S ec . 22. Every person may freely speak, write, or publish his senti
ments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse o f that rig h t;
and no law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech
or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions for libel, the truth of
the matter alleged to he libelous may be given in evidence to the jury,
and if it shall appear to the jury that the matter charged as libelous
be true, and was written or published with good motives and for justi
fiable ends, the party shall be acquitted.”
And the principle of universal education is there adopted (Art. X I I I ) ;
“ ( S e c t i o n 1. The legislature shall establish and maintain a system of
free public schools wherein all the children o f the State may be edu
cated.
“ (S ec . 2. The legislature shall provide for the establishment and
support of institutions for the care and education of the deaf, dumb,
and blind of the State.”
“ A kt . X X I . Educational, reformatory, and penal institutions and
those for the benefit of the insane, blind, deaf, and mute, and such
other institutions as the public good may require, shall be established
and supported by the State in such manner as may be prescribed by
law.”
NO SLAVER Y.
Thomas Jefferson was strongly opposed to slavery, as he Indicated
in many ways.
In his letter to E. Rutledge (1787) he stated :
“ This abomination must have an end. And there is a superior
bench reserved in heaven for those who hasten it.”
In the proposed Virginia constitution he subm itted:
“ No person hereafter coming into this country shall be held within
the same in slavery under any pretext whatever.”
(June, 1776.)
And also the follo w in g:
“ The general assembly (of Virginia) shall not have power to * * *
permit the introduction of any more slaves to reside in this State,
or the continuance of slavery beyond the generation which shall be
living on the 31st day of December, 1 8 0 0 ; all persons born after that
date being hereby declared free.”
51007— 9315
5
In commenting on the deplorable results of slavery, Thomas Jef
ferson said :
“ The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual ex
ercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting depotism
on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children
see this, and learn to imitate i t ; for man is an imitative animal. This
quality is the germ of education in man ; from his cradle to his grave
he is learning to do what he sees others do.”
And he also sa id :
“ Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have
removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people
that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be
violated, but with his wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when
I reflect that God is j u s t ; that his justice can not sleep forever; that
considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the
wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation is among possible even ts;
that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The A l
mighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest.”
M y fellow-citizens, I comment upon these doctrines of the patron
saint of the Democracy, because it was a failure on the part of the
Democratic party to develop and observe this one teaching of Jefferson,
which resulted in the retirement of that party from national control
during the last half century.
I have always thought that it was a providential thing for the poor
Ignorant blacks of Africa that they should have been brought in con
tact with the civilized races, even though it was through slavery, be
cause it led to their gradual improvement from savage life. Ultimately,
however, it was the unhappy influence of slavery which caused the
original Democratic party to go to defeat in 1860.
Thousands and
hundreds of thousands of men, who, previously to that time, had been
Jeffersonian Democrats, felt that Jefferson’s opinion with regard to
slavery was r ig h t; that the continuance of slavery was equally harmful
both to master and slave, and, under the leadership of Abraham Lin
coln, they first set their faces against the extension of slavery to the
Territories of the United States. Abraham Lincoln, in his speech at
Ottawa, 111., on August 2, 1858, in reply to Douglas, said :
“ I will say here while upon this subject that I have no purpose,
either directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery
in the States where it exists. I believe that I have not the lawful right
to do so and I have no inclination to do so.”
But, as the contention proceeded, those original Jeffersonian Demo
crats who opposed slavery became more and more resolved against it,
until such men, under the new name of the Republican party, deter
mined upon the complete abolishment of slavery in this country.
The same spirit of American liberty which determined that the
slavery of the black man under the forms of law should not exist in
this country will stand against the enslavement of white men by mo
nopolies under a more artful form of law. Organized gigantic monopo
lies have invaded every field, controlling the volume and rate of wages
paid to labor, and controlling the purchasing power of the wages & !
<
labor when paid.
Lincoln was opposed to the extension of the slavery of black men, and
before his term of office was out he already was foreseeing the danger
of the enslavement of white men.
lie foresaw the danger to the
humbler toiling citizen of arrogant organized capital, aud in his first
message to Congress pointed it out.
51007—9315
Am ong other things he sa id :
“ Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the
fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first ex
isted. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher
consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protec
tion as any other rights.
“ No men living are more worthy to he trusted than those who toil
up from poverty— none less inclined to take or touch aught which they
have not honestly earned. Let them beware of surrendering a political
power which they already possess, and which, if surrendered, will surely
be used to close the door of advancement against such as they, and to
fix new disabilities and burdens upon them, till all of liberty shall be
lost.”
The monopoly of various industries by skillfully organized capital has
such control now that laborers by thousands and hundreds of thousands
and millions are dependent for employment on those whose policy and
interest may be served by the discharge of these laborers. The giant
corporations deem it judicious, in cases, to restrict the output in order
to raise the price, and thus dismiss labor at one door and raise the
price to the laborer as consumer at the other door— deny him wages
with one hand and raise prices on him with the other.
Monopoly
means ultimate mastery on the one side and slavery on the other.
Monopoly means mastery of the one man and coequal servitude of the
other man.
NO MONOPOLY.
Thomas Jefferson vigorously opposed monopoly of every kind except
as a reward for literature and invention. He opposed monopoly in
land.
He pointed out the terrible effects of monopoly of land in France
in 1785 as fo llo w s:
“ The property of France is absolutely concentrated In a very few
hands, having revenues of from half a million of guineas a year down
wards. These employ the flower of the country as servants, some of
them having as many of 200 domestics, not laboring. They employ also
a great number of manufacturers and tradesmen and, lastly, the class
of laboring husbandmen. But, after all, there comes the most nu
merous of all the classes— that is, the poor, who can not find work.
I
asked myself what could be the reason that so many should be permit
ted to beg who are willing to work in a country where there is a very
considerable proportion of uncultivated lands. Those lands are undis
tributed only for the sake of game. It should seem, then, that it must
be because of the enormous wealth of the proprietors, which places them
above attention to the increase of their revenues by permitting these
lands to be labored.”
And if you will remember, gentlemen of the National Democratic
Club, you will recall that when this condition of monopoly reached a
certain point the finest qualities of monopolists were suddenly over
thrown and sent to the guillotine by the commonest kind of people in
one of the bloodiest revolutions known to history. The French revo
lution that overthrew this great monopoly had the good result of di
viding up the lands of France into small holdings, which has made
France one of the wealthiest and most powerful nations on earth, show
ing a power of recuperation after the Franco-Prussian war that wag
the astonishment of the world.
I think that, perhaps, few men realize the extreme danger created
by monopoly to the welfare and happiness of the people and to the
51007— 9315
1
stability of the country. The slavery of monopoly is not new in his
tory.
I recall a wonderful story of a monopoly recorded in Holy W rit that
was once established in the most fertile valley in the world, the valley
of the Nile.
It was in the reign of a king named Pharaoh. He had a commercial
adviser of great sagacity, a man, sold as a slave into Egypt, named
Joseph, of Hebrew extraction.
Under the advice of Joseph, Pharaoh and his captains stored all of
the surplus corn of Egypt during the seven years of plenty, and there
after during the seven years of drouth they had one of the richest mo
nopolies known to history.
The price of corn “ went up.”
There was a “ bull movement ” on corn.
The bears were not “ in it.”
The price of corn went “ sky high.”
And, first of all, Pharaoh and his captains took all of the money of
the Egyptians in exchange for corn, and next they took all their jew
elry in exchange for corn, and then—
“ They brought their cattle unto Joseph; and Joseph gave them bread
in exchange for horses and for the flocks and for the cattle of the
herds and for the asses, and he fed them with bread for all their cattle
for that year,” and the second year,
“ Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; ” “ for the
Egyptians sold every man his field because the famine prevailed over
them : so the land became Pharoah’s.”
And when the people had sold all of their property and land to Pha
raoh in exchange for corn, they said, “ Let us and our children work for
you for corn, and Pharaoh, being a benevolent man,” kindly permitted
them to do so.
And on these mild terms Pharaoh allowed them to have a portion of
the corn which they had raised with their own hands, because Pharaoh
was a benevolent man and had a sagacious adviser of fine commercial
instinct.
Then Joseph said unto the people, “ Behold, I have bought you this
day, and all your land, for P haraoh: lo, here is seed for you, and ye
shall sow the land.”
“ And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth
part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field,
and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for
your little ones.”
“ And they said, thou has saved our liv e s; ” and so it came to pass
that Pharoali was the savior of the country.
And Joseph and Pharaoh have not been the only monopolists who
have been called by their captives “ the saviors of the country.”
I
well recall a recent scene in which certain great men of enormous busi
ness sagacity are reputed, during certain recent years of plenty, to have
laid up for use enormous values in cash and cash credits, and to have
stored or made subject to control nearly all of the available cash and
cash credits iu New York— to have been piling It up for several years
on a bull market, and finally, when they had stored most of the
available cash in Egypt, there was a repetition of the days of Pharaoh—
and the famine came and the price of cash went up— there was a bull
movement on cash or a bear movement on stocks and bonds, and the
price of cash went sky high, and first of all Pharaoh and his captains
took over Morse and Ileintz and allied interests, and then they took
51007—9315
8
over Tennessee Coal and Iron and other properties too numerous to
mention, and still the price of cash went up. On October 24, 1907,
the price of cash was out of sight, because there was a monopoly of
cash in Egypt, and the Egyptians in W all street cried aloud and lifted
up their voices and said, “ Wherefore shall we die before thine eyes?
Let us have corn.”
And at 2 o’clock interest rates ran up to 150 per c e n t; Union Pacific
declined ten and a half points In ten sales, and at 2.15, when the Egyp
tians were on the point of falling dead, and were looking at each other
with ghastly faces, and considering the easiest way in which they might
commit suicide, lo, the “ saviors ” of America, Pharaoh and his captains,
“ let them have corn ” in exchange for their valued possessions.
“ And
th e
E g y p t ia n s
lift e d
up
t h e ir
v o ic e s ,
“ And they sa id : ‘ Thou hast saved our lives.’ ”
In the leading Standard Oil bank there are 23 directors; In the
leading Morgan bank there are 39 directors; and they, with their sub
ordinates and associates, making a number something less than 1 0 0
men, have control of every railway company, telegraph company, express
company, steamship company, and all o f the great Industrials which
have a monopoly in every one o f the great necessaries of life.
F o r those who are curious to see a more elaborate description o f this
system and the companies they control, I commend them to the remarks
o f Hon. R o b e r t M . L a F o l l e t t b , o f Wisconsin, in the United States
Senate during the last month.
These great combinations and trusts exercise a substantial monopoly
upon all of the great necessaries of life, and control their production,
transportation, and distribution.
In the last fifteen years these monopolies, commonly called trusts,
have been wonderfully developed in our country. John Moody, in his
revision of these statistics, bringing the figures down to January 1,
1908, presents the follo w in g.
Table shoieing grovjth of trusts. 190Jt-1908.
January 1, 1904.
Classification of trusts.
January 1, 1908.
Number
of
Total capitali
plants zation, stocks
acquired
and bonds
or con outstanding.
trolled.
Number
of
Total capitali
plants zation, stocks
acquired
and bonds
or con outstanding.
trolled.
1,638
5,038
1,528
3,426
$2,662,752,100
4,055,069,433
282
528,551,000
5,288
1,336
1,040
7,246,342,533
3,735,4.56,071
9,397,363,907
6,676
2,599
745
10,951,613,754
7,789,393,000
612,931,154,000
8,664
7 greater industrial trusts........
X/Csser industrial trusts__ ____
Important industrial trusts in
20,379,162,511
10,020
31,072,160,754
$2,708,438,754
8,243,175,000
(“)
Total important indusFranchise trusts - _ _ _______
Great railroad groups.
____
a The stock and bonds of industrials for 1909 aggregate $ 17,529,126,232,
Poor’s Manual of Industrials, 1910.
6 Railroad stock and bonds and assets for 1908 aggregate $ 1 9,370,078,153, Poor’s Manual of Railroads, 1909.
51007— 9315
L
9
.
The Increase In these two items thus appears to be over $13,000,and the incomplete returns for trust properties for 1909 exceed
$45,000,000,000.
One trust which he does not mention is “ the money trust,” the
community of interests known as the system, by which the money and
bank credits of the country, which is the lifeblood of commerce, can be
controlled.
The laws have been so written as to pile up, in large measure, the
reserves o f the banks o f the country in three cities. And those who
can control the supply of “ credits ” and of “ cash ” in the New York
banks can, of course, control the price of stocks and bonds, whose
market Is fixed in New York, and there is grim humor in heax-ing the
Egyptians pay tribute to the masters of monopoly and to see them fall
down and worship and to hear them declare, “ Thou hast saved our
lives.”
It would make a man almost doubt whether such lives were
worth saving.
Who is there so aall, so grossly ignorant, as not to perceive that
monopoly means mastei-y on the one side and slavery on the other?
The slavery of monopoly is not confined to the Egyptians on W all
stre e t; it also goes to the Egyptians on the farm. Let me, as a farmer
and an humble Egyptian, give you a simple illustration: From 1887
to 1894 I handled cattle. I had free ranges, cheap labor, and I worked
at this business industriously for seven years, and in that time sent
to market over 17,000 steers, and as a reward for my service In pre
paring food for the American people “ Pharaoh ” paid me not one dollar
in compensation above my actual expense. I earnestly thereafter ad
dressed my extremely limited intelligence to discovering the reason
why, and the reason was that when I took those cattle to the Kansas
City stock yards there was but one buyer— Pharaoh— who had a
monopoly on meat products, who had a monopoly by which he controlled
the price of cattle and hogs and sheep. He had various buyers in the
market, but only one price— the price was fixed every morning. W hat
chances has a farmer or a cattle producer against this evil combination
which fixes an arbitrary price upon his labor and upon everything
which goes into the c a ttle ; that is, upon his corn, his oats, his rye,
his millet, his wheat, his grass, and the labor of himself and of his
children? W hy, the farmer is only an Egyptian, and he, too, is allowed
to work for Pharaoh, because Pharaoh is a benevolent man.
The meat trust is more considerate in these days.
In the old days they killed the goose, of which I was one, that laid
the golden egg. In these days they are wiser, and they encourage the
goose to live by permitting him to have subsistence, while they content
themselves with plucking the goose of all surplus and taking all the
eggs.
W e have not In our country a single Pharaoh, but we have a hundred
Pharaohs and 10,000 captains of Pharaoh, who have a monopoly upon
every line of commerce, upon every railway, every steamship line, upon
every means of transportation, of conveying intelligence, of production
and of distribution; upon every express company, upon every telegraph
line, upon all of the great industries. Monopolies in iron, and steel, and
copper, and tin, and zinc, and lead, and all m eta ls; monopolies in every
line of chem icals; monopolies in every line of d ru gs; monopolies in fer
tilizers ; monopolies in all building materials, cement, plaster, lumber,
stone, g la s s ; monopolies in house furnishings; monopolies in tobacco;
monopolies in oil and all its by-products; monopolies in asphalt and
s a l t ; monopolies in various food products, including coffee, and tea, and
sugar, and meats, and canned goods, and crackers, and bakery products.
51007— 9315
0 0 0 ,0 0 0 ,
10
Monopolies in everything from the cradle of the child to the cerement
and casket of the grave.
Pharaoh has not been content with a monopoly of corn.
The Ethical Social League, at its conference on April 7, 1908, in
New York, pointed out some remarkable facts in relation to the smaller
purchasing power of the dollar paid in wages, and pointing out the
number of unemployed according to the statistics of Samuel S. Stodel,
as fo llo w s:
California----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Colorado____________________________________________________________
Connecticut________________________________________________________
Illinois______________________________________________________________
M assachusetts--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Missouri____________________________________________________________
Montana____________________________________________________________
Rhode Island-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------New York State-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Pennsylvania-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ohio____________________________________________________ ____________
Michigan-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------New Jersey---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Delaware------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------M ary lan d--------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------Virginia____________________________________________________________
W est Virginia---------------------------------------------------------------------------------North Carolina------------------------------------------------------------------------------Florida_____________________________________________________________
Oregon______________________________________________________________
W ashington________________________________________________________
Idaho_______________________________________________________________
Arizona----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Nevada_____________________________________________________________
Nebraska----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------Dakotas------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------Minnesota----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------W isconsin----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Indiana---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Kentucky---------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------Tennessee__________________________________ ________________________
Arkansas----------------------~
--------------------------------------------------------------------Louisiana-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Texas_______________________________________________________________
Alabama-------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------South Carolina-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Georgia----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
95, 000
40, 500
55, 000
300, 000
95, 000
85, 001)
18, 000
30, 000
750, 000
350, 000
200, 000
135, 000
8 0 ,0 0 0
30, 000
75, 000
42, 000
40, 000
30, 000
45, 000
5 1 ,0 0 0
44, 000
20, 000
12, 000
14, 000
19, 500
20, 000
43, 000
92, 000
00. 000
30, 000
23, 000
21, 000
47, 000
40, 000
39, 000
30, 000
27, 000
Total------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- 3, 100, 000
But I call your attention to these things, and to an unorganized
mob of 1 0 , 0 0 0 unemployed recently reported to have assembled in this
city, and driven away by platoons of mounted police. They were sing
ing a significant song— “ La Marseillaise.”
I call your attention to the operations of the tobacco trust, and the
apparently unthinking, unreasonable, and almost unexplainable viola
tions of law by the “ night riders ” of Kentucky and Tennessee.
Abraham Lincoln demanded, as the voice of the American people,
that slavery of the unoffending blacks should not be extended-to the
Territories of the United States, and later emancipated them all.
Thomas Jefferson protested against the slavery of man as an abstract
as well as a concrete proposition.
The old Democratic party was split asunder and driven from power
because a large part of that party was under the influence of those
who thought slavery justified.
The Republican party, which arose out of the loins of the Demo
cratic party, whose membership prior thereto had been Democrats,
51007— 9315
11
whose adherents had been and still were the disciples of Jefferson, went
into power, and has retained power almost as long as the Democratic
party did prior to 1860.
The same evil which tore the Democratic party in twain in 1860 is
tearing the Republican party in twain in 1908.
By natural processes the political power of monopoly has become
enthroned in the United States under forty years of Republican admin
istration. Both parties were agreed on the tariff in 1857. The ex
penses of war repaired a high tariff in 1861 for the raising of revenue,
and high tariff stimulated home m anufactories; it enabled the American
manufacturers to make money easily by taxing the American consumer.
Immediately there arose a special class who profited by the-privilege
of taxing their fellow-citizens under shelter of the tariff law which
cut off foreign competition.
When foreign competition had been extinguished and home compe
tition began to be engendered, the most natural thing in the world took
place. W ith the telegraph and telephone and lightning express trains
available, commercial competitors quickly assembled in peaceful con
ference, arranging various devices by which competition with each
other was extinguished and a monopoly in every line of commerce was
assured.
And now Pharaoh and his captains are in control, and millions of the
Egyptians are paying for the privilege of working for Pharaoh and his
captains, who are the “ saviors ” of mankind as the captains of mo
nopoly and employers of labor.
There are said to be over 6,000,000 women driven by economic need
out of the homes of America, outside of domestic service, compelled to
earn their daily bread in competition with the wages of m a n ; hun
dreds of thousands of young and tender children are being sacrificed
on the altars of Mammon under the grinding process of modern mo
nopoly and the exacting demands o f corporation owners, who cry for
“ dividends, dividends, dividends,” on watered stock, of which only a
fractional part is honest capital entitled to interest.
The domestic and social relations of the sexes have been seriously
changed by these harsh conditions, and women have invaded every
avenue of labor.
The homes which women naturally love, for which they are nat
urally fitted, the homes where they should find their employment and
render the most valuable service to the Nation in being the mothers
of the Nation and in teaching to the children of the Nation the lessons
of religion, morality, industry, and frugality, have been impaired in
serious degree, the man and the woman and the child being obliged to
work long hours in order to retain for themselves enough for the neces
saries of life, after the stealthy hands of the captains of Pharaoh
have levied the artful tribute of monopoly upon every dollar received
for their wages.
Of course, Mr. President and gentlemen, I realize and thoroughly well
understand that many of the great beneficiaries of monopoly are, i a
fact, men of high benevolence and of sincere patriotism.
It is also true that some men, who are so religious that they will not
shave on Sunday, find no conscientious scruples against shaving other
men for the balance of the week ; but among tlie captains of Pharaoh
there are also many men of great intelligence, and of great benevo
lence, and of great patriotism, who do not realize the effect of monopoly
on the weaker laboring elements of the Nation. Their benevolence is shown
by sucb enormous contributions to education and to the public servico,
51007— 9315
a
such as the benefactions of John D. Rockefeller, o f Andrew Carnegie,
and other very rich men. They are entitled to personal credit for their
good works and to discredit for their bad works. Their good works,
however, show that the men who have conducted successful monopolies
under the shelter of law and in spite of law have the same generous
impulses which God has planted in the hearts of the great majority of
®ien.
It would, however, be asking too much of human nature to
expect those who have been or are successful in the manipulation of
business and in the establishment of monopoly, by which their ambi
tion for power and for property accumulation is gratified, to ask them
to contribute to the control of monopoly by law.
This duty is im
posed upon the patriotic sons of America of both parties— of both those
who have always adhered to the original Democratic party or to that
branch of the Democratic party that arose under the new name of
“ Republican party.”
It matters but little under what banner men may promote good gov
ernment, provided they stand for those principles which shall secure to
all an equal opportunity in life, an equal right to “ life, liberty, and
the pursuit of happiness.”
It gives me the greatest pleasure to pay my homage to the patron
saint of the Democracy, because he stood firmly against the terrible
evils of slavery and of its twin brother— monopoly.
The people of Oklahoma have put on record their opposition to mo
nopoly in these w ords:
“ S ec . 32. Perpetuities and monopolies are contrary to the genius of
a free government, and shall never be allowed, nor shall the law of
primogeniture or entailments ever be in force in this State.”
And because primogeniture and entailments promote monopoly, Okla
homa has followed the teachings of Jefferson, in forbidding primogeni
ture or entailment.
Thomas Jefferson, in the Declaration of Independence, made the
declaration :
“ We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable
rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
And section 2 in the bill of rights of the Oklahoma constitution not
only declared that all persons have the right to life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness, but added the following words, “ and the enjoy
ment of the gains of their own industry.”
The Oklahoma constitution goes further ; it provides the means by
which monopoly shall be controlled, and the citizens of that State may
peacefully enjoy the gains o f their own industry.
The first movement the people of my State adopted to protect them
selves against modern monopoly was to put into effect the “ initiative
and referendum,” by which the people of the State “ reserved to them
selves the power to propose laws and amendments to the constitution
and to enact or reject the same ” at the polls independent of the legis
lature, and also reserved power at their own option to approve or
reject at the polls any act of the legislature. This power goes to every
county and district in the State, and every city of 2,000 or more people
may write their own charter of local self-government.
The constitution provides for a mandatory primary for the nomina
tion of all candidates for state, district, county, and municipal officers
for all political parties, including United States Senators.
In this way no machine politics will ever be engineered by the
monopolies in Oklahoma.
51007— 9315
13
The first act of the constitutional convention was to drive out of
town the lobbies of railroads and monopolies assembled for the purpose
of influencing the constitutional convention.
The constitution of Oklahoma did not content itself by merely de
claring that monopolies should not be allowed, but they provided for the
remedy of the evil by the eompletest publicity.
In the bill of rights will be found the follow ing:
“ S ec . 28. The records, books, and files of all corporations shall be, at
all times, liable and subject to the full visitorial and inquisitorial
powers of the State.”
And because monopolies heretofore have bidden themselves behind the
constitutional provision, “ that no man shall be required to give evi
dence which might tend to incriminate him,” section 27 of the bill of
rights requires any person having knowledge of facts that tend to estab
lish the guilt of any other person or corporation charged with an
offense against the laws of the State shall not be excused from giving
testimony on the ground that it may tend to incriminate him, but no
person shall be prosecuted on account of any transaction, matter, or
thing concerning which he may give evidence.
The corporation commission of Oklahoma, under the constitution,
is
given full power to compel publicity and to exercise control of corpo
rations doing business in that State, and are required to ascertain the
actual value of the capital invested in any such corporation as a basis
of determining their charges, if excessive, and have the right and duty
to determine the charges made by such corporations for any service
performed in the State.
It has been said that Thomas Jefferson believed with Jesus of Naza
reth in the doctrine of loving your neighbor as you love yourself, and
that he was the first statesman to write into a public document the
genuine teaching of Christ, and he wrote it in one word— Equality.”
The time has come in the United States when this great doctrine
should be recognized in our statecraft. When the thousands of our
citizens who have distinguished themselves in commercial enterprises or
adventure shall realize the truth that their own happiness would be
better subserved if they would cease exploiting their power over their
neighbors and brothers ; if they would be content with a small interest
upon vast accumulations of the wealth produced by the labor of the
American people; if they would be content with the property which
they have heretofore, either justly or unjustly, taken from the pro
ducers of the Nation, and from this time forward consent that the
American producers shall be allowed, in the language of the Oklahoma
constitution, to have “ the enjoyment of the gains of their own in
dustry.”
It seems to me that it would be unwise to destroy the great corpora
tions which have been constructed in this country by our so-called
captains o f industry.
I have read with great interest the address of George W . Perkins,
esq., on the “ Modern Corporations,” before the Columbia University,
of February 7, lt>08. He argues in favor of organization, and denies
that these great organizations are due to the greed of man for wealth
and power. He points out the injury of destructive competition, the
harm of commercial warfare, the economy and efficiency of the modem
corporation, its value in standardizing wares, its power to steady wages
and prices.
He argues that we should control the corporations; that the corpo
rations owe a duty to the general public, and best serve themselves and
51007— 9315
14
their stockholders by recognizing that duty and respecting i t ; that these
great corporations are, in fact, great trusteeships, and the larger the
number of stockholders the more it assumes the nature of an institu
tion of savings. He points out the great growth in the number of
stockholders in various railways and in United States Steel. And with
much of this argument I find myself strongly inclined to agree.
I wonder if Mr. Perkins will agree with me when I express the hope
that these great trusteeships of gigantic monopolies, when controlled
by the people of the United States, shall be content to be confined to a
reasonable interest upon the money actually invested?
We have a perfect right to control these monopolies legally, morally,
and it is a patriotic duty to do so. And they should not be permitted
to tax the American people in excess of a fair interest on the capital
actually invested. If they were so controlled, it would give stability
to w ages; we would hear no more of overproduction nor of under
consumption, but these enterprises would proceed upon rational lines
and work for the welfare of all of the people of our common country.
It seems to me that such investments of capital which have estab
lished monopolies in interstate commerce should be limited to a maxi
mum earning of 1 0 per cent per annum on their actual investments,
and 'that they should be allowed to lay up as a trust fund abundant
surplus to provide against contingencies. They would then cease to
be private monopolies and would become public monopolies, retaining
all of their desirable features and having none of the injurious features
left. The owners of such monopolies, if patriotic, should be content
with this adjustment, which would be equitable and fair and just to
them and to the people of the United States.
The first step in the control of these corporations must necessarily
be complete publicity, requiring a sworn report of actual assets, based
upon a true valuation, with penalties of imprisonment for any false
affidavit, together with accurate and frequent reports of the actual earn
ings of such company and the disposition of such earnings. The excess
earnings over and above a rational return on these monopolies might
well go into the Treasury and be employed in improving our national
waterways and in building good roads.
T H E O PP O R T U N ITY FOR T H E REVIVED DEMOCRACY.
W hile there are many thousands of patriotic Republican citizens who
earnestly desire the protection of our country from the corrupting po
litical influence and the insidious robbery by these great corporations,
it would be very unreasonable, if not impossible, to expect the Repub
lican party to give such relief to the country, for the obvious reason
that these selfish interests which have been built up behind a tariff wall
have entwined and intertwisted themselves into the machine politics of
the Republican party until they exercise a dominating influence and
control over the organization of that party.
The patriotic elements of the Republican party are too disorganized
to bring up to their own standards of good citizenship the selfish in
terests in that party. Theodore Roosevelt has made many excellent
recommendations, which have either been ignored or so indifferently
complied with that during the seven years of his service instead of these
monopolies being abated and controlled they have increased beyond any
thing known in human history.
The disinterested, unselfish Republicans should be invited and en
couraged by the revived Democracy to rally around the flag of Jefferson
and join the Democracy in restoring the Government to the highest
Ideals, from which we have in recent decades departed.
51007— 9315
15
The people of the new State of Oklahoma have laid down the prin
ciples of good government in their constitution, which are drawn from
teachings of Jefferson, and which should he a beacon light to guide all
the patriotic sons of America, of all parties, hack to the days of good
government and of sound national health, in which our people shall
have peace and happiness, in which women and children shall be per
mitted to return to their homes and be withdrawn from commercial
slavery, when men shall be permitted to enjoy the fruits of their own
industry, and when capital shall be content with a reasonable interest
upon an actual investment, and when every rich man shall find his hap
piness in promoting the brotherhood of man and not in stealing from
his fellow-men, by craft or force, the proceeds of their labor merely to
pile it up as a monument to their own ambition and folly.
When the principles of Thomas Jefferson, which have been wonder
fully worked out and developed in the constitution of Oklahoma, shall
have been established throughout the Union, we will see an end to
harmful monopolies in our country and a wonderful intellectual and
spiritual development of the American people, as well as a commercial
development for which the past holds no parallel. When these prin
ciples of good government shall have been established men will more
and more pay tribute to the man who pointed the way and will celebrate
with greater and greater honor the 13th of April, the birthday of the
immortal Jefferson, the patron saint of the Democracy.
51007— 9315
o
a Oklai
>ank h
'O ll
U
t woulc
at a
unders
e, any l
yet lit
icularly ,
go meae
i eraerg<
as to .
stance. >
aitetl Stj|!
denies s'
emerge!.
:ead.
1
Oklalit
the rej
t tiiey o'
to.
banks, a
■ deficit
e
eir quota
le tlirou
laterial, t
which 1
,
ued agaii
),000 of s i
if surplusj
es so issu
nit may
lited Stat
1 bonds t
^
lited Statt
tanding a
jay for tl
100 in tl
[ amount «
e out an|
Hint of till
slant! evatfS
i of Unite;
•oad bonds
r o f bank
nitstandin
ition, in mi
!.
It is ai
/
DEMOCRACY AND THE TARIFF
SPEECH
OF
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
OF O K L A H O M A
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
MAY 27, 1909
W A S H IN G T O N
1909
86796—8398
SPEECH
OF
H 0 N . ROBERT
L. O W E N
The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, having under consideration
the bill (H . R. 1438) to provide revenue, equalize duties, and encourage
the industries of the United States, and for other purposes—
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P resident : I have listened with interest to the Demo
cratic Senators from Louisiana urging a tariff rate on sugar
which will give “ protection ” to the sugar planters of Louisi
ana, Colorado, and other States, and the citations of the
junior Senator from Louisiana, quoting Washington, Jefferson,
Madison, Andrew Jackson, and various great Democrats down
to Samuel J. Tilden, showing that they approved— incidental—
protection under a revenue-producing tariff.
I have observed the vote of various Democratic Senators for
a revenue duty, with its incidental protection, on lumber, iron,
and so forth, and various Democratic speeches favoring a duty
on articles produced in their several States, with rates which
carried incidental protection to such industries.
It has been suggested in various ways that the action of
these Senators was not Democratic. Mr. President, I do not
agree with the suggestion that this is necessarily a just criti
cism of their action.
Mr. President, the first duty of a Democratic representative
is to represent the will of the people who have sent him. He
has no right, in my opinion, to disregard the well-known wishes
of the great majority of the people of his State, and should
resign if he can not represent them.
lie has a right to believe, however, that when he is nominated
and elected by the Democrats of his State he is elected by those
who believe substantially in the teaching of Democracy. And
I respectfully submit that these Senators have not violated
the true canons of the Democracy when they vote for a tax on
lumber, or on lead and zinc, or hides, or on pineapples, when
they represent the wishes of the majority of the people of their
States, provided always that the duty imposed is not pro
hibitive, does not prevent competition, and is laid at a point
not in excess of a maximum revenue-producing point.
Article I of section 8 of the Constitution lays down the
authority of Congress, which every Senator must construe on
2
86796— 8398
3
honor to tlie best of his judgment and according to the dictates
of his conscience—
That the Congress shall have power to levy and collect taxes, duties,
imposts, and excises to pay the debts and to provide for the common
defense and general welfare of the United States.
When, under the color o f raising the revenue for the common
defense and general welfare o f the United States, a duty is
imposed having for its purpose to prevent importations and
prevent a revenue being derived from such pretended revenue
law, it is a transparent wrong, a violation of the spirit of the
Constitution itself, and is not Democratic doctrine. Taxation
can only have for its legitimate object the raising of money for
public purposes and the proper needs of government economic
ally administered, and the exaction of moneys from citizens for
other purposes and to favor private interests at the expense of
all the people is not a proper exercise of this power. ISo one
has more strongly expressed than Cooley the distinction between
a duty imposed for revenue under the constitutional authority
and a duty imposed for the purpose of preventing imports, and
thereby protecting some industry from competition. Cooley says:
It Is only essential that the legislature keep within its proper sphere,
and should not impose burdens under the name of taxation which are
not taxes in fa c t; and its decision as to what is proper, just, and politi
cal must then be final and conclusive. (Con. Lim., 7th ed., p. 078.)
John Marshall said, in McCulloch v. Maryland (4 Wheat.,
316) :
The power of taxing the people and their property is essential to the
very existence of government, and may he legitimately exercised on the
objects to which it is applicable to the utmost extent to which the gov
ernment may choose to carry it. The only security against the abuse of
this power is found in the structure of the government itself. In im
posing a tax the legislature acts upon its constituents. This is, in gen
eral, a sufficient security against erroneous and oppressive taxation.
The people of a State, therefore, give to their government a right of
taxing themselves and their property; and as the exigencies of the gov
ernment can not be limited, they prescribe no limits to the exercise of
this right, resting confidently on the interest of the legislator and on
the influence of the constituents over their representative to guard them
against its abuse.
Aud in the case of Providence v. Billings (4 Pet., 514) be said :
The power of legislation, and consequently of taxation, operates on all
persons and property belonging to the body politic. This is an original
principle, which has its foundation in society itself. It is granted by
all for the benefit of all. It resides in the government as part of itself,
and need not be reserved where property of any description, or the right
to use it in any manner, is granted to individuals or corporate bodies.
However absolute the right of an individual may be, it is still in the
nature of that right that it must bear a portion of tlie public burdens,
and that portion must be determined by the legislature.
This vital
power may be abused; but the interest, wisdom, and justice of the repre86796— 839S
4
sentative body and its relations with its constituents furnish the only
security where there is no express contract against unjust and excessive
taxation, as -well as against unwise legislation generally.
With the consent of the Senate, I desire to insert in the
an extract from Cooley and from the decisions of the
Supreme Court upon this point.
R
ecord
T H E PU R P O SE S OP T A X A T IO N .
Constitutionally a tax can have no other basis than the raising of a
revenue for public purposes, and whatever governmental exaction has
not this basis is tyrannical and unlawful. A tax on imports, therefore,
the purpose of which is, not to raise a revenue, hut to discourage and
indirectly prohibit some particular import for the benefit of some home
manufacture, m ay well be questioned as being merely colorable, and
therefore not warranted by constitutional principles. But if any in
come is derived from the levy, the fact that incidental protection is
given to home industry can be no objection to it, for all taxes must be
laid with some regard to their effect upon the prosperity of the people
and the welfare of the country, and their validity can n o t . be deter
mined by the money returns. This rule has been applied when, the levy
produced no returns w hatever; it being held not competent to assail
the motives of Congress by showing that the levy was made, nett for the
purpose of revenue, but to annihilate the subject of the levy by impos
ing a burden which it could not bear.
(Veazie Bank v. E'enno, 8 W all.,
533.)
Practically, therefore, a law purporting to levy taxes, and not
being on its face subject to objection, is unassailable, whatever may
have been the real purpose. And perhaps even prohibitory duties may
be defended as a regulation of commercial intercourse.
L E V IE S FOR T R IV A T B P U R P O SE S.
Where, however, a tax is avowedly laid for a private purpose, it is
illegal and void. The following are illustrations of taxes for private
purposes. A tax levied to aid private parties or corporations to estab
lish themselves in business as manufacturers (Loan Association v.
Topeka, 20 W all., 655, 6 6 3 ; Aliev v. Jay, 60 Me., 124) ; a tax, the pro
ceeds of which are to be loaned out to individuals who have suffered
from a great fire (Lowell v. Boston, 11 M ass., 4 5 4 ) ; a tax to supply
with provisions and seed such farmers as have lost their crops (State
v. Osawkee, 14 Kans., 4 1 8 ) ; a tax to build a dam, which, at discretion,
is to be devoted to private purposes (Attorney-General v. Eau Claire, 37
W is., 400) ; a tax to refund moneys to individuals, which they have
paid to relieve themselves from an impending military draft (Tyson v.
School Directors, 51 Penn., Sr., 9 ; Crowell v. Hopkinton, 45 N. H ., 9 ;
Usher v. Colchester, 33 Conn., 5 6 7 ; Freeland v. Hastings, 10 Allen
(M a ss.), 5 7 0 ; Miller v. Grandy, 13 M ich., 540) ; and so on. In any one
of these cases the public may be incidentally benefited, but the inci
dental benefit is only such as the public might receive from the industry
and enterprise of individuals in their own affairs, and will not support
exactions under the name of taxation.
But, primarily, the determination what Is a public purpose belongs
to the legislature, and its action is subject to no review or restraint
so long as it is not m anifestly colorable. A ll cases of doubt must be
solved in favor of the validity of legislative action, for the obvious
reason that the question is legislative, and only becomes judicial when
there is a plain excess of legislative authority. A court can only arrest
the proceedings and declare a levy void when the absence of public
interest in the purpose for which the funds are to be raised Is so clear
86796— 8398
5
and palpable aa to be perceptible to any mind at first blush.
(Broadhead v. Milwaukee, 19 W is., 624, 6 5 2 ; Cheancy v. Hooser, 9 B. Monr.
(K y .), 330, 3 4 5 ; Booth v. Woodbury, 32 Conn., 118, 1 2 8 ; Hammett v.
Philadelphia, 65 Penn. St., 1 4 6 ; Tide W ater Co. v. Coster, 18 N. J.
Eq., 518.)
But sometimes the public purpose is clear, though the immediate
benefit is private and individual. For example, the Government prom
ises and pays bounties and pensions; but in every case the promise or
payment is made on a consideration of some advantage or service given
or rendered or to be given or rendered to the public, which is supposed
to be an equivalent; and the law for the payment has in view only the
public interest, and does not differ in principle or purpose from a law
for the payment of salaries to public officers. The same is true where
a State continues the payment of salaries to officers who have been
superannuated in its service. The question whether they shall be paid
is purely political and resolves itself into t h i s : Whether the State will
thereby probably secure better and more valuable service, and whether,
therefore, it would be wise and politic for the State to give the seem
ing bounty.
Where a law for the levy of a tax shows on its face the purpose
to collect money from the people and appropriate it to some private
object, the execution ot the law may be resisted by those of whom the
exaction is made, and the courts, if appealed to, will enjoin collection
or give remedy in damages if property Is seized. But if a tax law on
its face discloses no illegality, there can in general be no such remedy.
Such is the case with the taxes levied under authority of Congress;
they are levied without any specification of particular purposes to which
the collections shall be devoted, and the fact that an intent exists to
misapply some portion of the revenue produced can not be a ground of
illegality in the tax itself.
In cases arising in local government an
intended misappropriation may sometimes be enjoined; but this could
seldom or never happen in case of an intended or suspected misap
propriation by a State or by the United States, neither of them being
subject to the process of injunction.
The remedies for such cases
are therefore political and can only be administered through the
elections.
(Cooley’s Principles of Constitutional Law, Chap. IV, p. 57,
The Powers of Congress.)
The bills of rights in the American constitutions forbid that parties
shall be deprived of property except by the law of the la n d ; but if
the prohibition had been omitted, a legislative enactment to pass one
man’s property over to another would, nevertheless, be void.
(See
Cooley’s Con. Limitations, p. 208.)
Nor, where fundamental rights are declared by the Constitution, is
it necessary at the same time to prohibit the legislature, in express
terms, from taking them away. The declaration is itself a prohibition,
and is inserted in the Constitution for the express purpose of opera
ting as a restriction upon legislative power. (See Cooley's Con. Lim ita
tions, p. 209.)
Cooley also states on page 587, in speaking of the power of taxation,
as follo w s: “ Taxes are defined to be burdens or charges imposed by the
legislative power upon persons or property, to raise money for public
purposes.”
Again, on page 598, he says : “ Everything that may be done under
the name of taxation is not necessarily a tax ; and it may happen that
an oppressive burden imposed by the Government, when it comes to be
carefully scrutinized, will prove, instead of a tax, to be an unlawful
confiscation of property, unwarranted by any principle of constitutional
government. In the first place, taxation having for its only legitimate
80796— 8393
6
object the raising of money for public purposes and the proper needs of
government, the exaction of moneys from the citizens for other pur
poses, is not a proper exercise of this power, and must therefore be un
authorized.”
The Supreme Court of the United States, in the Topeka case, said :
“ To lay with one hand the power of the Government on the property
of the citizen and with the other to bestow it upon favored individuals
to aid private enterprises and build up private fortunes is none the less
a robbery because it is done under the forms of laio and is called
taxation. This is not legislation; it is a decree under legislative form s.”
(20 W allace, 664, in Loan Asso. v. Topeka.)
Mr. OWEN. Mr. Cooley, in Constitutional Limitations, points
out with great force that a legislator has no constitutional right,
under the color of imposing a duty hy which to raise revenues,
to pass a law which, in fact, has the purpose to prevent im
portation and the raising o f revenue hy such pretended duty,
hut which in reality has for its purpose to build up private for
tunes by preventing competition.
The Democracy has declared in one o f its planks in the'plat
form of 1892 in favor of a tariff for “ revenue only,” which is
only another way o f saying that duties shall not be imposed for
any other purposes than revenue; that they shall not be imposed
for the purpose o f excluding importations and giving monopoly
to combinations in this country, against which the Democracy
has continually protested since 1892; but this language can not
justly be construed to mean a declaration against incidental
protection. The fact that it was so unjustly construed led the
Democrats to drop the word “ only ” in the platform of 1S96.
thus affirming the doctrine of the Democracy that incidental
protection is entirely just when equitably distributed.
Every tariff for revenue and for revenue only carries with it
an unavoidable “ protection.” This unavoidable protection is
called “ incidental protection ” —that is, a protection incidental
to the raising of revenues under a constitutional tariff.
To say, therefore, that it is undemocratic to demand the inci
dental benefits or incidental protection of a revenue-producing
tariff to be equitably distributed is utterly unreasonable and
absurd. The very essence of Democracy is equality before the
law and under the law, and since every tariff for revenue
carries an incidental protection, it is perfectly just and per
fectly right to ask that its benefits be equitably distributed.
I therefore have no fault to find with Democrats who, represent
ing their own States, demand a tariff for revenue which shall
give incidental protection to their own States.
I venture to say that the Democratic Senators from Louisiana
would probably cease to represent that State if they ignored the
wishes of the people of that State in laying a revenue-producing
duty carrying incidental protection to the sugar planter.
86796— 8398
7
I should myself vote for a lower duty on sugar and increase
the competition with the American Sugar Refining Company,
whose exactions, I think, too great. Indeed, I favor free lum
ber, paper and wood pulp, free iron, free coal, free wool, and free
hides, and free raw materials as a general rule. Rut I shall not
take issue with the Democratic Senators of Louisiana because
they represent the will of the constituency which sent them nor
read them out of the party. If the Senators from Louisiana
advocated a duty so high as to exclude foreign sugar from our
country, cutting off potential foreign competition and estab
lishing a complete monopoly behind a tariff wall for the sugar
planter, I should then say, that although they claimed to be
Democrats and claimed to represent a Democratic State, they
were not Democrats on this sugar schedule and that their State
was not Democratic in regard to this schedule, but, notwith
standing that fact, I should even in that contingency still he
glad to see their cooperation in every other respect ivith the
organized Democracy.
Mr. President, I can not approve the view of those statesmen
who lay down too hard and fast or dogmatic rule by which
they approve or condemn a man who claims to be a Democrat,
and would refuse political association to a man who believes
with the Democracy in the body of the Democratic doctrine,
but represents occasionally a local interest at variance with a
national platform. No member of any great political party
agrees in every particular with every other member of that
party. There must be greater or less differences among six or
eight millions of people as to what constitutes Democracy, and
as to what constitutes Republicanism. As I understand the
differences the Democratic doctrine insists on freedom of speech,
freedom of the press, freedom of conscience, the equality of all
citizens before the law, the greatest good to the greatest num
ber, the faithful observance of constitutional limitations, and
believes in as great a measure of decentralization as is con
sistent with the strict exercise of the national function, while
the Republican party generally believes in the greatest exercise
of the national function, unmindful or in willful disregard of
the reserved rights of the States, although against this is re
cently appearing some respectable Republican reaction, and
therefore the tendency of the Republican party is to give con
stantly increasing powers to the centralized government, while
the Democratic party insists that the powers of government
should be retained as near to the people as possible. The
Democratic party would trust the people more; the Republican
party would trust the convention leaders of the people more;
86796— 8398
8
the Republican party would exclude foreign competition, actual
or potential, for the benefit o f certain favored individuals and
the enrichment of private persons and corporations, while the
Democratic party would favor a tariff for revenue carrying in
cidental protection, but not to the extent o f cutting down the
revenue by being above the maximum revenue-producing point
or cutting off foreign competition and so establishing monopoly.
Both parties declare themselves attached to purity of govern
ment, and both parties practice it just in degree as the judgment
and the consciences of the local constituencies require.
The Democrats in 1892 denounced Republican protection as a
fraud, a robbery of the great majority of the American people
for the benefit o f the few. It should be observed that it was
not protection or incidental protection which was denounced as
a fraud; it was “ Republican protection” which was denounced
as a fraud, as a robbery of the great majority of the American
people for the benefit o f the few. It was pointed out at the
same time by this Democratic platform that this robbery of the
great majority was due to monopolies built up as a natural con
sequence of the prohibitive taxes, which prevented free competi
tion. There is an element of justice and wisdom in so drafting
our revenue tariff as to afford incidental protection to American
industries. And a tariff for revenue which imposes a duty upon
articles of international trade high enough to produce a proper
revenue will always be found high enough to protect American
labor and the American manufacturer who desires of his fellowcitizens nothing more than a tariff rate which shall equal “ the
difference in the cost of production at home and abroad.”
The Republican party pretends to stand for this, but in the
Senate and House have utterly disregarded this rational stand
ard, have ignored “ the difference in the cost of production,”
which will not equal 20 per cent, and written a tariff averag
ing more than 100 per cent higher than would be required to
equal “ the difference in the cost of production at home and
abroad.” They have written a tariff to prevent legitimate com
petition, and in this manner promote monopoly and favor special
persons and corporations at the expense of all the people.
It seems to me that the Democratic party contains within
itself and should welcome and embrace all of those whose sym
pathies are, in the main, with the Democracy, and not impose
too narrow or too dogmatic standards of Democracy, which will
tend to disintegrate that great party of the people and make its
future success impossible.
The first duty of a patriotic minority is to become a majority
and write its principles into the laws.
8G796— 8398
O
SIXTY-FIRST CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION.
The Tariff.
SPEECH
OF
II ON. R O B E R T
OF
L. O W E N ,
OKLAHOM A,
I n the Senate of the U nited States,
Tuesday, June 15, 1909.
The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, having under consideration
the bill (H . R. 1438) to provide revenue, equalize duties, and encourage
the industries of the United States, and for other purposes—
I
r
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P resident : No consideration ivould induce me to propose
or contend for a tariff reduction which would seriously harm
any American industry whose existence is justified by the nat
ural resources of our country.
Upon my oath as a Senator of the United States, I feel
charged with a solemn responsibility of defending the welfare
o f the people of the United States, including as vigorously and
as distinctly the interests of the people of Maine, of Rhode
Island,' or of California as the interests of the people of Okla
homa. I shall discharge that duty as an American in a broad
and liberal spirit, with patience, with tolerance, and perfect
fairness.
By that sense of duty I have felt impelled to submit to the
Senate ^he reasons which make it impossible for me to support
H. R. 1438. I can not agree to the passage of this bill without
the registration of a solemn protest against it. I plainly see
the evil results upon the people of the United States, which
have followed the McKinley bill and the Dingley bill, and which
must follow the passage o f a worse measure.
Mr. President, I am not unmindful that what I shall say will
not deter the managers of this bill in the Senate in the least
from their predetermined course, but I deem it my duty to place
upon the records of the Senate and of the United States the
reasons which justify my protest and from which future stu
dents may perhaps find something of value in determining this
question, when they shall consider it with intellectual and moral
integrity and not in a spirit o f trade, of barter, or of easy com
pliance with the demand of special interests, whose lobbyists
swarm the corridors of this Capitol.
Resident, mere denunciation of a bill, or of the managers
^
serving no good purpose unless proof is
> :e^ed which shall be convincing to thoughtful and honest men
that the condemnation is thoroughly justified
In pointing out the injurious effects of what I shall demon
strate to be a monopoly-protecting tariff upon our entire people
including every class of consumers, every class of producers)
every class o f manufacturers or distributers or merchants ex
cept the masters of monopoly, I shall do so dispassionately,
with a composed temper and with an earnest desire to offer
reasons, at least, to those now trusted by our people with power
why they should not persist in a policy full of injury and harm
to the Republic.
I shall be compelled in this discussion to point out the logical
consequences of a monopoly-protecting tariff; its effect its dan
gerous effect, in piling up stupendous wealth on the one side in
the hands of its favorites, and in. causing great wretchedness
and poverty on the other side among the weaker and more de
fenseless classes of our people.
When I point out the unavoidable effect of extreme poverty
as the necessary complement o f unlimited wealth in the hands
of the few accumulated under the shelter of law. I wish it
distinctly understood that the dark picture of human misery
which the truth compels me to portray breathes from me no
spirit of pessimism, because I am full of hope. I recognize the
immediate dawn of better things and an early remedy. The
89032— 8445
increasing intelligence of our people already begins to under
stand the causes of these conditions and to formulate the
natural and reasonable remedy for their correction. The spirit
of benevolence and of patriotism which characterizes the great
body of our people and, I rejoice to say, moves a multitude of
the beneficiaries of our unwise system gives promise for an
early correction of the injurious consequences tvhich naturally
follow’ a prohibitive tariff, with its necessary brood of success
ful monopolies, by the reduction of that tariff; if not now,
through the party in power, then by the unwearied Democracy
that has been faithfully pointing out its evils for twenty-five
years. I shall endeavor to point out some of the injurious con
sequences of the tariff-engendered monopolies and their crush
ing effect upon human life ; but in doing so I shall not be under
stood as a pessimist, because I am precisely the contrary.
O P T IM IS T .
Mr. President, I am an optimist; because I feel that the
Anglo-Saxon race and the Teutonic blood represented in this
country by millions of men of the northern races of Europe
and Great Britain and the adopted sons o f other great nations
in our land have an unquenchable love of liberty, of justice,
and of compassion, and will correct every evil of our great
Government; because our forefathers distinguished themselves
by a love of liberty that dared death in every form to establish
it and maintain it in the bosom of this Republic; because our im
mediate forefathers not only loved liberty, but they practiced that
form of government which made liberty a working force in the
administration of this Government from the days when the town
meeting in New England, in Massachusetts, Mr. President, in Con
necticut, and in Rhode Island instructed their representatives
according to the will of a free people. In those good old days
when the Representative was not a machine-made politician, but
was a Representative in the highest and best sense—of repre
senting directly the opinions and the commercial interests of the
common people who sent him.
I am an optimist because of my perfect confidence in the great
body of the American people, whose stability, patriotism, and
common sense will control this country and direct it along sound
paths of good government; because I see in many directions
the gradual restoration of the right and powrnr of the peo
ple to select their public servants directly, and directly require
them to carry out their will. I rejoice to see the establishment
of the initiative and referendum in Maine and in Oregon and
in other States, as well as in Oklahoma, and the establishment
of the direct primary in so many of our States.
I rejoice to see the people Instructing their legislatures in the
selection of Senators, and while I did not receive any report
from the Senator from Michigan, as chairman of the Committee
on Privileges and Elections, of the proposed amendment to the
Constitution of the United States, I had the honor to submit
during the last Congress, for the election of Senators by direct
vote of the people, I have felt justified in being an optimist
because I was able to point out 24 States in the Union that had
requested from their legislative assemblage this restoration to
the people of their ancient right of rule.
Now, Mr. President, I am an optimist, notwithstanding the
hostile attitude of the leaders now in control o f the Senate, be
cause already there are 29 States, including Michigan, the State
of the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Privileges
and Elections, in which the election of Senators is controlled by
the direct voice of the people.0 It will only be a few short years
when 46 of the States will be controlled in this manner; and
when that day comes, no Senator in this Chamber will be so
callous as to mock the pledges made to the people in national
platforms.
° Alabama, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois,
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana. Maryland. Michigan, * Missouri,
Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, Okla
homa, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vir
ginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. Of these California, Nevada, Idaho
and Michigan came in this year— 1909.
CONGEE SSIONAL EE CORD
A I am an optimist, Mr. President, because of tbe magnificent
growth of our Republic under tbe blessings of liberty.
from 5,000,000 people in 1800 we Rave over eiglity-five
millions in 1907. From five billions o f wealth in 1800 we have
a hundred and twenty-five billion in 1900. From a weak nation
we have become potentially the greatest nation in the world;
but above all, Mr. President, has been our increase in the means
of intelligence.
I orests are now converted into paper with lightning speed.
Volumes innumerable, filled with learning upon every subject,
are crowding into the pathway of knowledge; but chief of all
the modern newspapers, filled" with learning, wit, and humor,
illustrated with splendid descriptions and photographs of every
thing • in the heavens above, the earth beneath, and the waters
•
under the earth,” are thrust into the hands of the wayfaring
man for a price incredibly small, so that he who runs may read
and instantly learn what is transpiring in regard to everything
ot human interest at home and abroad, so that every citizen may
know at breakfast every fact transpiring on earth that he cares
to know, from the diplomatic questions of foreign courts to the
wonderful home run of Casey on the Chicago ball grounds,
from the market quotations of London and New York to the
astonishing description of the last wild beast slain on the
eastern coast of Africa by one of our very distinguished fellowcitizens.
While it is true that thirty-five thousand millions of dollars
of the proceeds of human labor in the United States have passed
into the hands of various corporations, and a very large part
of all of the net proceeds of American labor have been improp
erly acquired by monopoly; and while 7,000,000 women have
been driven from out the peaceful shelter of the American home
into commercial rivalry with men; and while 5,000,000 children
in like manner are being driven under the commercial whip to
sacrifice their youth, in large part, to the demand of Mammon;
and while there are many millions of men who regard life with
great anxiety, constantly in fear of the drastic power of extreme
poverty and lack of employment, still I see that the American
workman, in the factories of our land, have exhibited a net
output per capita of over twelve hundred dollars, from which
the legitimate demand on him for the support of an American
can be met and still leave a large surplus earning.
-Lhe American people have shown that they are far more than
abundantly capable of sustaining themselves and making the
most substantial contribution to the wealth of the Republic
a a
^ e world and still leave themselves reasonable leisure.
And, finally, Mr. President, I am an optimist because I believe
tnat the American people— who love liberty, who believe in selfgovernment, who believe in mercy and in charity as well as in
austry and providence— will see to it that this Government is
' , conducted by their representatives that in the future there
, ? b . < a morc equitable distribution of the proceeds of human
b
t_ °-! ’ _ia.t we shall change the present policy, whose inevitable
tvm cucy is the useless, the vulgar, and insane enrichment of
r>hv .eW at the expense of the misery and sorrow and of the
i
and m-i
sPiritual degeneration of millions of men, women,
‘
. V ren who are now submei’ged by the devices o f com.
xneicia ism gone mad.
PrY't > fk °lltd not pass,
'H
It never has, Air. President, at any time contemplated so re
ducing the tariff as to injuriously affect any legitimate industry
whatever. On the contrary, while it has pointed vigorously to
the fraud and false pretenses of the monopoly protecting tariff,
it always has been mindful of the rights of capital legitimately
employed in manufacture, and equally mindful of labor em
ployed in industries established under the shelter of our tariff
system.
In 1884 the Democratic national platform said:
Alany industries have come to rely upon legislation for successful
continuance, so that any change of law must be at every step regard
ful of the labor and capital thus Involved. The process of reform must
be subjected in. the execution to this plain dictate of justice ; all taxa
tion shall be limited to the requirements of economical government.
The necessary reduction of taxation can and must be effected without
depriving American labor of the ability to compete successfully with
foreign labor and without imposing lower rates of duty than will be
ample to cover any increased cost of production which may exist in
consequence of the higher rate of wages prevailing in this country.
The practice of writing these schedules at prohibitive rates
and preventing competition and engendering monopoly has been
fiercely condemned by the Democracy as “ robbery of the great
majority for the benefit of the fe w ” (1892). It has de
manded a constitutional tariff drawn for the purpose of revenue,
hut has not condemned the unavoidable incidental protection
which any tariff for revenue, or for revenue only, unavoidably
affords, and which will always be found sufficient for the inci
dental protection of legitimate industry.
The reason why protection AS PRACTICED has been de
nounced as “ robbery ” is because such schedules have been
drawn not for constitutional revenue purposes, but to shelter
monopoly and permit monopoly to wrongfully tax the people
under the color of a pretended revenue law.
The party to which I have the honor to belong, therefore
(1908), welcomed the promise of tariff reform offered by the
Republican party in 1908 on the basis of “ the difference between
tbe cost of production at home and abroad,” for the obvious
reason that a tariff so drawn would necessarily be a tariff for
revenue with only such incidental protection as justice and
common sense requires.
It was this kind of tariff law drawn in 1846, with which both
parties were well satisfied in 1856. If this law were now so
drawn, the contention between the two great parties on this is
sue would necessarily cease. [For party platforms compared
see Exhibit 11.]
The party leaders of both great parties declared the purpose
of reducing the tariff downward. No manner of explanation
or evasion can alter the substantial truth that it was the ex
pressed will of the American people making itself felt through
both party platforms and through both party leaders that there
should be a substantial reduction of tariff duties.
The Republican platform of 190S declares “ unequivocally ” —
a remarkable word in a platform, and suggests the purpose of
equivocation— “ for revision of the tariff by special session of
the Congress immediately following the inauguration of the
next President,” and says:
In all tariff legislation the true principle of protection is best main
tained by the imposition of such duties as will equal the difference be
tween cost of production at home and abroad, together with a reason
able profit to American industries.
The platform also says that it is the Republican policy—
AMERICAN^PEbpLE^°NTI^^^^ T ^
°
WILL °F T E To preserve which American manufacturers,security aguinst foreign
H competition to without excessive duties the farmers, and producers
tlle American people were promised by both are entitled, but also to maintain the high standard of living of the
wage-workers of this country, who are the most direct beneficiaries of
substantial
of tlle tariff. and had a right to expect the protective system.
iioonlo assomrn!^10? ; The representatives of one-half of the
Excessive duties are here condemned by the leaders of the Re
o r o n slv in
n at Denver, emphasized this matter most vig- publican party, and in 1904 the Republican platform declared:
' ■ 1
Democratic platform in the following language:
The measure of protection should always at least equal the differ
r?
i've ^0™ .,ittle belated promise of tariff reform now offered by tbe
e
ence in the cost of production at home and abroad.
Even in the majority report o f the House committee, page
This platform declared:
2, section 1, they declared:
work('t o ea P ie r t f w h i i S? telr intrust the execution of tins important
ra
interests ^ t l ^ R e p u b U c a n pa?ty. oW ga ted to the highlg protected
This platform states:
While duties should be protective, they should he adjusted as nearly
as possible to represent the difference in cost of production at home and
abroad.
IT
V IO LA TE S
THE
REPU BLICA N PLEDGES.
The rates of the hill submitted by the Finance Committee
was postponed* an til a fte r 1thp1^ 1 ^
^
,fa 5? that the PIomised relief
in which the Republican n a r t v electlfin— an election to succeed average higher than the Dingley bill and are not a reduction
beneficiaries of the high p r o ti'c tT r r ^ J l^ the. . s“ me support from the at all.
received from th em ; and to the f n r t w £ 5*
always heretofore
The chairman of the Committee on Finance ostentatiously sets
terrupted power no action whatPVA^Lo filct thjlt, during years of uninforth 379 items on which reductions are made.
dongi-ess to correct the a d m itte d ly ^ isT in g 'tL lff iM quitie^ Kepublican
These reductions, as will appear in the C ongressional R ecord
This platform further declared:
of May 5 and by Exhibit 12, I here submit, are items of no na
d u ties1^ * 1 immediate revision of the tariff by the reduction of import tional importance.
Two hundred and seventy-four of these
items involve articles whose imports are less than $25,000, or
Which 1 have the lionor to belong has, since severally less than one-thirtieth part of 1 penny gross imports
a pr° per re*orm °t the inequalities, injustices, per capita. The table which I submit gives the items in excess
and false pietenses of a tariff controlled by selfish interests at where the imports of such articles amounted to over $25,000,
the expense of the American people
and the table discloses the fact that the total imports except
89032—8445
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
ing lumber was extremely small, and that the pretended reduc
tions are of no importance, while the increases are of substantial
importance.
Mr. President, this bill should not passs, because it violates the
pledges of the Republican party and of the Republican leader
during the last campaign. The party platform, I have shown
above, is unequivocal. Its reasonable and natural interpreta
tion is plain. The Senator from Indiana on May 25 set forth
at great length the declarations of the President of the United
States, quoting him as pledging the American people—
Genuine and honest revision
* *
* substantially a revision down
ward, though there will probably be a few exceptions-—
As delivered by the President September 24, 1908.
No wonder the Republican Senator from Minnesota [Mr. N el
s o n ] demands to know what this special session was called for,
if it was merely to rewrite the Dingley bill.
No wonder the Republican Senators from Iowa, Indiana,
Nebraska, Minnesota, and Wisconsin and other States vehe
mently protest against this betrayal of the party pledge. The
Senator from Massachusetts will explain in vain to the Ameri
can people that it was not the purpose of the party to have a
substantial revision downward, as the President said, September
24. 1908, at Milwaukee.
The President in his inaugural address reiterated his con
struction of the purposes of the party, as was strongly pointed
out by the Senator from Indiana, and stated in the most positive
manner:
It Is imperatively necessary, therefore, that a tariff bill be drawn in
good faith in accordance with promises made before the election by the
party in power.
And on December 17 last the President is quoted as having
said before the Ohio Society:
Better no revision at all, better that the new bill should fail, unless
we have an honest and thorough revision on the basis laid down and
the principles outlined in the party platform.
The Republican platform declared in 1904 for a tariff law
merely “ equal to the difference in the cost of production at
home and abroad,” and in 1908 likewise declared for—
Such duties as will equal the difference between the cost of produc
tion at home and abroad.
And yet the leaders of that party, neither in the House nor
in the Senate, have concerned themselves to compile “ the dif
ference in the cost of production at home and abroad,” although
they have submitted many volumes of thousands of pages of
confused miscellany, a small portion under oath, a large portion
not under oath, with no safeguard whatever, and coming from
selfish interests seeking the privilege of monopoly over the
American people.
When I, as a Senator of the United States, representing the
people of the United States, from Maine to California, and en
titled by the honor and dignity of my position to a proper an
swer, demand to know “ why the difference in the cost of pro
duction at home and abroad” had not been compiled as a basis
for the drafting of this statute, the Senator from New Hamp
shire rises in his place and solemnly advises me that my inquiry
is “ absurd.” [Turning to the Senator from New Hampshire,
Mr. G allinger .] lie will find his remarks on page 2214 of the
C ongressional R ecord.
The suggestion is made by other Republican leaders that the
Information can not be obtained, and when I myself offer over
446 items which had been compiled ten years ago by Carroll D.
i\ right, Commissioner o f Labor, they show themselves ac
Y
quainted with the matter, confess that this information can be
obtained, and plead that the report is not up to date.
The Senator from Rhode Island, chairman of the Committee
on Finance, rises in his place and, with a fine sense of humor
excited by my request and inquiry why the difference in cost of
production had not been compiled, advises me with amused satire
that he will have a clerk compile for me a list of publications
relating to the tariff, but will be unable to furnish me with the
intelligence to digest them.
I shall not question the intelligence of the chairman of the
Comndttee on Finance, nor shall I reply to him in kind
I
appeal from him to the American people, who will not hold him
guiltless for his callous and reprehensible conduct in this
matter.
Mr. President, I keenly regret to feel impelled to comment in
this manner upon the conduct of public business in the Senate
Not only has the chairman o f the Oommittee on Finance not
furnished the Senate “ the difference in the cost of production
at home and abroad; ” not only has he not made a proper re
port to the Senate in regard to this matter; not only has he
replied with satirical indifference to a respectful demand for
proper information which he was charged with the duty of ob
taining, but he has withheld information upon this point ob89032— 8445
3
tained by our Department o f State, through the German Gov
ernment, for the express purpose of our enlightenment. He has
done, Mr. President, what is infinitely more reprehensible; he
has refused to the Senator of Virginia and to the other Demo
cratic members of the Senate Finance Committee the privilege
of having the same information as he himself has enjoyed by
virtue of being an officer of this body; and when, Mr. President,
his attention is called to this unjust and unconstitutional con
duct, he justifies it by quoting from an evil precedent of Demo
cratic origin and seemed to think he had fully answered for
this breach of duty.
Mr. President, a bad Democratic precedent is no more re
spectable to me than a bad precedent from any other source.
The conduct of the chairman of the Committee on Finance in
holding secret meetings with regard to this public matter and
in giving repeated confidential audiences to the agents of mo
nopoly, whose advice is influencing the various paragraphs of
this bill in their own interests against the interests of the Amer
ican people, is a bad precedent either to set or to follow, and puts
the management of the Senate of the United States under the
suspicion of a want of frankness and of a want of sincerity in
drawing these schedules. It is of the highest national im
portance that the Senate of the United States and every Member
of it should not only be above suspicion, but, as far as possible,
beyond danger of being deceived or misled.
This evil precedent has already borne bad fruit, and the chair
man of the Committee on Finance has been induced to put into
this bill and to retain in this bill many so-called “ jokers ” —
that is, words and phrases, innocent in appearance, with farreaching consequences, favorable to the beneficiary and unfavor
able to the people. These devices have already been pointed out
on the floor, and I shall not pause to enumerate them. No court
of justice, and no high official of government charged with a
sacred trust should permit himself to conduct “ star-chamber
proceedings,” because it is almost sure to bring upon himself the
odium of suspicion and public hostility as a Member of the
United States Senate.
I enter my emphatic protest against this conduct of the public
business as a precedent. It should not be permitted to stand
as a precedent
The poor excuse that the Democratic Members were lately
furnished with the assistance of two statisticians does not in
the least degree excuse this grossly improper method of conduct
ing the public business. These experts were not furnished until
it was too late to use their services advantageously for the
proper digest and amendment of this bill.
For over a year the Republican Members have given it out
that they were preparing this bill, and yet with all this time
they have never yet furnished either the House or Senate with
“ the difference in the cost of production at home and abroad ”
of the items in the paragraphs of the Dingley bill, which they
were honor bound to do by the platform of 1904 and by the plat
form of 190S, which required the redrawing of these paragraphs
on this precise basis.
They can furnish no explanation of this astonishing and
shocking neglect of duty, except perhaps the explanation offered
by the Senator from South Carolina, who humorously apolo
gized for them—
That they could not he expected to furnish a rope with which to hang
themselves.
Is it possible, Mr. President, that men o f nobility and char
acter, that Senators trusted by the people with such power,
have knowingly refused to compile “ the difference in the cost
o f production at home and abroad ” on the items of the Dingley
bill for our present guidance because they intended to break
faith with the American people and did not dare to make the
truth manifest by compiling this damning evidence of their
betrayal of their party pledges?
Whatever the purpose, Mr. President, the responsible authori
ties of the Senate in charge of this bill have furnished every
thing else except the evidence in point, and have obscured the
issues both in the Senate and House by many volumes of undi
gested and undigestible matter, as well calculated to confuse
the mind of an intelligent and laborious legislator as the huge
volumes of testimony bundled before the petit jury in the crim
inal-rich cases, for the purpose of befogging the issue and as
suring a miscarriage of justice.
In answer to my resolute demand for this information, the
managers of the Senate, presenting and sustaining this bill,
undertook to ridicule and discourage the inquiry. The chair
man of the Committee on Finance [Mr. A l d r ic h ] indulges in
satire, evasion, and suggests a lack of intelligence in the inquiry.
The Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. G a l lin g er ] declares
the inquiry absurd. The Senator from Montana [Mr. C arter ]
suggests that Senators can not expect to be fed with an intel
4
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
lectual spoon, and so forth. And this is the utterly contemptible
and pusillanimous manner in which party pledges are redeemed.
This is the answer made to a respectful inquiry, why this infor
mation is not furnished as to “ the difference in the cost of pro
duction at home and abroad,” and why this bill is not written
in the light of this evidence, as the party pledged itself to do to
the American people.
Mr. President, the Republican leaders in charge of this bill
occupy a position absolutely and utterly indefensible. They
have boldly and openly violated the pledges of the party and
have sacrificed the interests of the American people to benefit
those selfish interests which are using these high schedules for
the purpose of sheltering monopoly.
Mr. President, I can not help but believe that the Republican
leaders, acting through the subtle influence of machine politics,
have been led into a support of these high ■schedules without
fully realizing that they are violating their party pledges, which
confines them to the difference of the cost of production at home
and abroad, but having made the error, defend it from false
pride of opinion.
They have been, not perhaps quite hypnotized, but over
whelmed with the “ power of suggestion ” enveloping them and
creating the atmosphere and controlling environment established
by a swarm of attorneys, special pleaders, and fascinating rep
resentatives of the high-tariff beneficiaries.
They seem to have entirely lost sight of the principle of pro
tection taught by their forefathers and defended by their own
platform. This bill ought not to pass.
because
it
v i o l a t e s t h e t r u e p r i n c i p l e o f l e g i t i m a t e PR O TE C T IO N ,
W H IC H DOES NOT ENGENDER OR DEFEND MONOPOLY.
This bill ought not to pass, because it violates the principle
of protection from beginning to end.
Mr. President, if there is one thing that ought to be more
thoroughly understood than another in this country it is—
The principle of legitimate protection.
There is not the slightest doubt about what it means from the
days of Alexander Hamilton to this good day. The meaning of
protection is absolutely clear to all students of economy, and
that is a duty under a constitutional revenue tariff, so levied
as to equal “ the difference in cost of production at home and
abroad,” and thus enable the American manufacturer to meet
o-n equal terms the competition of the foreign manufacturer,
who enjoys cheaper labor or more favorable conditions, but
not to establish monopoly by prohibitive duties.
Alexander Hamilton, in his famous report on the encourage
ment of manufacturers, gives the reasons for this policy. It
accePted by Washington, by Jefferson, by Madison, by
Andrew Jackson, and various Democratic leaders down to the
nays of Samuel J. Tilden and Grover Cleveland, and has not
een denied, as far as I am informed, by any great Democratic
9e. democratic platform of 1884 vigorously declared that in
reduemg the tariff the reduction—
compete
witl}out depriving American labor of the ability to
rates of <intve?v!*Udy .,witb foreign labor, and without imposing lower
tion which rn«5 an i * •be amPle to cover any increased cost of producW
vailing in this c ° X t in consequence of the higher rate of wages pre-
And the Republican platform o f 1904 says:
ence iV'the^oost
a
i
sbould always, at least, equal the di:
f . P ° 6'action at home and abroad.
following' words^:ne ^ repeated again in the tariff of 1908 iu
of "such^dr?ties'P 1
wi
/C
+!icm best maintained by the imposition
,-is
t l n U i S r a n d a l L T al *** difrercnce letween the cost o fp r o d u c
a
The Republican platform of 1908, however, adds the words:
Together with a reasonable profit to A m e r ic a n in d u s t r ie s .
industry which it has an honest right to ask, as I shall imme
diately show.
The Democratic doctrine has been the correct one; that is, a
tariff as low as economical government will permit, and not so
low as to injure any legitimate industry established under our
tariff system, contending that a tariff for revenue properly drawn
will meet by incidental protection every legitimate demand.
I shall not pause to discuss the difference between the two
parties. I shall content myself with showing that this bill does
not conform to the principle of legitimate protection, absolute or
incidental, laid down by either party, but under the pretense of
protecting American labor and American capital legitimately
employed it is written in such a manner as to utterly ignore the
principles of protection as taught by the Republicans themselves.
This will be perfectly obvious to any man who will take the
schedules submitted under the head of “ Estimated revenues of
this bill,” of April 12, 1909, showing the rates proposed by this
present bill and the comparison of the rates with the Dingley bill.
T H E D IFFERE N CE IN T H E COST OF PRODUCTION AT H O M E AND ABROAD.
The cost of production depends on materials and labor.
Materials are as cheap in the markets of the world to the
American as to the European, except as we tax import of raw
material by our own statute. Our policy, with few exceptions,
is to admit raw material free, so that the question of the rel
ative cost of materials is of very small relative importance.
Our manufacturers get free raw materials for their export
business by refund of duties paid.
Many materials are cheaper in the United States than they
are abroad, except where controlled by our unrestrained monop
olies.
LABOR COST.
Labor cost in wages in the protected industries, measured by
efficiency and the purchasing poxcer of xeages paid to labor, is
approximately the same in the United States as in Europe, ex
cept where the American wage-earner is highly organized.
1. I shall undertake to show that this is true by showing that
the money paid American labor in protected industries is ap
proximately on an average but little more than that paid in
Europe.
2. That the American workman is twice as efficient, and be
cause of efficiency is entitled to twice the wage of the European
workman, and that the difference in labor cost compared to the
value of the product is in favor of the American manufacturer.
3. I shall undertake to show that $150 of wages in the
United States buys only what a hundred dollars buys in Europe
in' manufactured goods, and for this reason the American man
ufacturer does not pay his labor as much in proportion to work
done as the European manufacturer.
4. I shall undertake to show, finally, that the total percentage
of wages to the gross product of all American manufacturers
is only 17.8 per cent of the gross value of the product, and,
therefore, that the difference in the cost of production in the
United States and abroad must be on an average less than this
percentage. I f labor abroad cost half as much as in the United
States, as the high protectionists pretend, then the difference in
cost of production necessary to be provided for by a purely pro
tective tariff would be less than the average of 10 per cent,
while a revenue tariff would be between 30 and 40 per cent.
I shall undertake to show the bad effect of a prohibitive
tariff on wages, on commerce, on distribution of wealth, and in
corrupting of public and private life.
3. Effect of prohibitive tariff.
ON W AG ES.
(a) Has lowered wages relative to product.
(b) Has lowered wages in protected industries compared to
unprotected industries.
(c) Has lowered purchasing power of wages.
(d) Has established monopoly, and, consequently,
This latter is not the doctrine of protection. It is the political
1. Has prevented or obstructed the organization of labor.
. 1
inon°Poly. It is the latest political device of those
2. Restricted output and diminished demand for labor.
P .. ave been fraudulently building up monopoly under color
3. Has substituted foreign pauper labor for American labor.
of the doctrine of protection.
4. Has required ruinous hours.
lin n e n ^ w °F rat» hily° sincerely and justly declared “ Repub5. Subjected labor to bad housing, bad water, insanitary con
t
a fraud and the shelter of monopoly. The
?ratt? tariff fo^ro™ 3USt| be free trade.
tariff foi revenue to ^ nd deceitfully declared the Demo ditions. increased mortality o f labor.
y
cratic
6. Has
7. Has destroyed political liberty of its labor in large
* ! j S I . lU< ,ertake’ Mr- President, to show that the tariff under
1S
t e ( ctrine for revenue would be three times as high as a tariff measure.
8. Has impaired labor’s commercial independence.
drawn puiely for purposes of protection under the principles
9. Has appropriated all the net proceeds of labor and accumu
laid down in the Republican platform of equaling the difference
m the cost of production at home and abroad, if it were honestlv lated it in the hands of the few.
drawn.
J
ON COM M ERCE.
The Democratic doctrine of a tariff for revenue is not free
(a) Has weakened our imports and exports.
trade or anything which approximates it. It is a tariff high
(ft) Has diminished the output of smaller factories, depend
enough to abundantly afford every protection to any American ing for material on monopolies.
89032— 8445
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
5
(c)
Has raised prices in United States 50 per cent above the
American laborer and for the protection o f the American manu
prices abroad, thus diminishing consumption.
facturer from bankruptcy.
1.
This means a ruinous tax on the man or woman with H E LOW ER WAGES IN EUROPE O FF SE T BY GREATER E F F IC IE N C Y OF A M E R I
T
fixed income. A man with income of $1,500 has one-third of
CAN LABOR.
income confiscated by monopolies’ high prices.
James G. Blaine once said:
This affects ail men with fixed income. The clerk, the serv
That the actual labor cost o f the American
is less because
ant, the government employee, the pensioner, the man receiving the effectiveness of American labor was superior product of the working
to that
fixed return from investment, yields one-third of it all to man of any other nation on earth.
monopoly.
Prof. William G. Clark, indorsed as an authority by the Sen
ON D IST R IB U T IO N OF W E A L T H .
ator from New Hampshire [Mr. Gallinger], in the Engineering
1. It has piled up enormous wealth in few hands, which now Magazine for May, 1904, submits a table, which he bases on
grows with accumulating force, absorbing all natural oppor official data, showing the comparative productivity of American
tunities of life. The oil fields, coal, ore, timber, transportation, labor for the year 1900, as follows, to w it:
and transmission services, municipal franchises, real estate, American, average annual output___________________________________ $2, 450
water powers, with the inevitable result, if not checked, of Canadian, average annual o u tp u t___________________________________ 1, 455
ou
900
commercial mastery and commercial slavery and destruction Australian, average annual tp utp u t__________________________________
French, average annual o u
t______________________________________
640
of political independence.
England, average annual output_____________________________________
556
460
2. It has corrupted our public life, our elections, our cities, German, average annual o u tp u t_____________________________________
our courts, legislatures, and executive officers, and our private
I do not assert that these figures are strictly correct, but be
citizens.
lieve it will be generally conceded that the American workman
F IR S T . R EL AT IVE LABOR COST.
has at least twice the efficiency of the European workman, be
Mr. President, I wish to point out the relative labor cost, be cause o f the use of superior machinery, modern appliances, and
cause in considering this matter as a student, I have faithfully more effective invention.
undertaken to do so. What I shall say will be as a student of PER CEN T OF WAGES TO VALUE OF PRODUCT NOT CONSIDERED IN T A R IF F
RATES OF PEN D IN G B IL L .
this matter and not as a mere controversialist—and I defy
The percentage which labor receives upon the gross product in
the Committee on Finance to challenge the accuracy of the
figures which I submit to the Senate—the labor cost of material the textiles industry, for example, as compiled by our owm census
is the first great factor that ought to be considered by the Sen on manufactures, is only 19.5 per cen t; and yet when the woolen
ate. The percentage which labor bears to various products, as schedule, for example, is examined, the present bill puts yarn, 143
shown by our statistical tables, is carefully set forth in Exhibit per cent (par. 373) ; knit fabrics, 141 per cent (par. 374) ; plushes
1, taken from volumes 7-10 on manufactures of our federal and other pile fabrics, 141 per cent; wool advanced in any man
ner beyond scouring, 140 per cent; w
’oolen cloths or worsted, 134
census.
It is true that the Census Bureau neglected to work out the per cent (par. 374) ; blankets, 107 per cent; flannels for under
percentages of labor cost, but that is a mathematical problem wear, 143 per cent; dress goods, coat linings, and so forth, 105
easy of solution, to which I have given industrious attention. per cent (par. 376) ; felts, not woven, 95 per cent; wearing ap
I call the attention of the Senate to these percentages, which parel, clothes, dolman, jackets, ulsters, and so forth, for ladies
are of vital importance if this bill is to be writen in a spirit and children, SO per cent; hats o f wool, 92 per cent; shawls, 92
of integrity. From this table it appears that labor’s share of per cent; woolen carpets, 114 per cent (par. 389).
Grossly violating the principle of protection, even from the
the gross product in the food industries was 5.7 per cent; in
textiles, 19.5 per cent; in iron and steel, 22.10 per cent; lumber, Republican standpoint, and even in cotton cloth, which is par
27.4 per cent; leather industries, 1G.5 per cent; in paper and ticularly needed by our poorest people, cotton carpets are taxed
printing, 21.6 per cent; in liquors and beverages, 8.9 per cent; 50 per cent (par. 389). Cotton cloth, 42 per cent, and as high as
in chemicals and allied products, 8 per cent; clay, glass, and 61 per cent for different kinds of cotton cloth; cotton handker
stone products, 37.1 per cent; in metals and metal products, chiefs, 55 per cent; cotton sleeve linings, 58 per cent.
Mr. President, the cost of labor in transforming wool and
12.7 per cent; tobacco products, 18.9 per cent; for vehicles for
land transportation, 34.4 per cent; in shipbuilding, 35.2 per cent; cotton into cloth is small. It does not exceed an average of 25
in miscellaneous industries, 19.9 per cent.
per cent, and in England it is slightly more than in the United
The average of wages paid to labor, compared with the gross States, because the labor there is not so efficient as in the
product in the 14 great industries, therefore, is only 1 9 . 7 per United States; and the difference in the cost of production at
cent of the gross product. And yet the leaders bring in this home and abroad as far as the labor cost in cotton and woolen
bill with the average three times as high as the total labor cost, cloth is concerned is almost a negligible quantity.
It will not do, Mr. President, to attempt to deceive anyone
and ask us, representing the people of the United States, to
accept it without a murmur and without a protest. They have by pretending that the difference in cost of production of items
neglected to point out the difference of the cost of production on this bill at home and abroad is not available, or that it
at home and abroad. I have undertaken to do so, and to put would take years to compile it, as the managers of this bill have
upon the records of the Senate a lasting memorial of what this asserted on the floor of the Senate during this debate. It is
cost is, that they shall not leave this matter without explana available, and it has been collected on many sample products.
tion to the people of the United States. It shall be recorded
I had the honor to submit to the Senate, during the present
and it is recorded by the tables which I shall immediately sub session, the report of Carroll D. Wright, Commissioner of Labor,
mit.
of 1898, who carefully examined into this question of costs, giv
Mr. President, before I submit these tables, however, I wish ing the precise amounts of costs in 446 instances. And in re
to call attention to the report of Carroll I). Wright. I have sug gard to w
’oolen goods he show's that No. 1 woolen yarn can be
gested heretofore to the managers of this bill that they mi "lit made at a labor cost of 5.44 per cent of the finished product
consult the tables of Carroll I). Wright with advantage He (S. Doc. 20, 55th Cong., 3d sess., p. 84) ; that woolen yarn
offers 446 different articles, with the total labor cost measured No. 2 could be made with a labor cost of 4.74 per cent of the
to the cent in each and every one of them, taking this informa finished product; that woolen yarn No. 3 could be made for
tion from the United States, from Germany, from Belgium, from 7.11 per cent of the finished product; that w’oolen yarn No. 4
England, and he verifies in these particular instances tlie ac could be made for 6.49 per cent o f the finished product; that
curacy of our general tables taken from the Census Bureau.
woolen yarn No. 5 could be made at a cost of 7.71 per cent of
Obviously, the difference in the percentage which the wages the finished product; that woolen yarn No. 6 could be made at
of labor abroad would bear to manufactured products in like a labor cost of 9.29 per cent of the finished product; and
great industries will be somewhat similar to the percentage in including the entire cost of labor in transformation materials,
this country. Wages are somewhat cheaper abroad in the pro which are shown in No. 426, that woolen cloth in the United
tected industries than they are in this country, and if the aver States, 55 inches wide, 24 ounces to the yard, can be made at a
age wage was only half abroad what it is at home, the differ labor cost of 16.44 per cent of the finished product.
ence in the cost of wages at home and abroad would not exceed
But the Committee on Finance approve a rate of 143 per cent
10 per cent ad valorem on the gross products of labor in all of on woolen yarn.
our 14 great groups of manufacturing industries; but when it
Mr. President, if I should point out all of such inequalities
is remembered that American labor is twice as productive in between the cost o f production at home and abroad and the
this country as it is abroad, even this 10 per cent disappears. rates fixed by this bill, with its 4,000 items, it would require
Notwithstanding this important and vital fact, the representa a volume and many days of time. I therefore content myself
tives of high protection continually declaim that a 50 per cent with a complete demonstration o f the general character of this
tariff is almost solely and exclusively in the interest of the bill in its indifference to the principles of protection as laid
89032— 8445
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
6
down in the Republican platform, and will then proceed with
other considerations.
I take a few items from Carroll D. Wright’s report, giving the
cost of labor in transforming wool into blankets in the United
States, compiled by him under the instructions of the Senate ten
years ago, and o f woolen cloth.
He explains that this work was obtained directly from the
manufacturers by the Department o f Labor, using “ experts
from the department, detailed for that purpose.”
He shows the total cost of labor in blankets, cloth, and woolen
yarns to be from 5 per cent to 30 per cent.
W oolen goods— Continued.
No. 392.— Blankets: United S tates; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
W h ite ; medium grad e ; all w o o l; same general description as product
No. 390, but made of cheaper quality wool.
Amount.
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor..................
?J
«nted S,t a te s: 1 8 9 7 ; unit. 1 pound.
m ? 1 ' warP. 16 c u t; filling, 10 c u t; 46 threads
Picks of filling per inch ; size, 72x80 inches ; weight, 6
Amount.
of
materials . . . .
Cost of materials aud all other items exoppt
Amount.
Per cent
of total.
SO.145
.787
. 932
100.00
100.00
Per cent
of total.
80.1417
.3096
Sj.40
68.60
100.00
No. 394.— Blankets: United S ta tes; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
W h ite ; best grad e; cotton warp and wool fillin g: warp No. 1 6 ; fill
ing, 10 c u t; 52 threads of warp and 42 picks of filling per in ch ; size,
60x72 in ch es; weight, 5 pounds.
W h ite ; n a vy; all wool - warn v i „ + .’ I V ? ,’ 1 ,
rrrurn JIDfl 24
of H is '
i
i Cllt J filling, C
pounds
P
fiUing Per ^ c h ; ’ ize, 58x1
s
Amount.
Amount.
Cost of labor in transforming material*
Cost of materials and all other i t e S S c ^ t k K r ....................
18.57
81.43
.4513
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor..................
15.56
84.44
Total cost.............
.
No. 393.— Blankets: United S ta te s ; 1897 ; unit. 1 pound.
All w ool; warps, 11 c u t; filling, 9 c u t; 2 3 i threads of warp and 27
picks of filling per in ch ; size 58x76 inches; weight, 2 pounds.
Woolen goods.
8
80.13
.57
.70
[From report of Carroll D. Wright, Commissioner of Labor, 1898, by
experts on cost, in answer to Senate resolution.]
nmf
poun'dsP a ^
Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor...................
$0.0978
.5422
15.28
84.72
.6400
100.00
Total cost...............
No. 3 9 2 .— Blankets: United State* • icn~
,
.
W h ite ; medium grade • a l l w ^ i 1 8 9 ‘ ; u n it 1 1 und-. ,
P°J
uct No. 390, but made of c h L ^ 1 : same Seneral description as prodoneaper qualitv wool.
j
SO.125
.668
15.76
84.24
Total cost....................................................................................
Per cent
of total.
Per cent
of total.
.793
100.00
No. 40 0 .— Blankets: United S ta tes; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
Ilo r s e ; medium grad e; all w o o l; warp and filling, both 5 -c u t: 22
threads of warp and 22 picks of filling per in ch ; size, 84x90 inches;
weight, 7 pounds.
'
Per cent
Amount. of total.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
------------------- -------- --------- -— — — ___
Cost of labor in transforming material*
Cost of materials and all other items except'labor!
S . 13
O
.57
18.57
81.43
80.0850 ^
.3607
19.07
80.93
.4457
Cost of materials and all other items except labor..................
100.00
Total cost...........................
No. 393.— Blankets: United State* • ia <r
All wool: warp, 11 cut - «i n, ®
t
No. 401.— B lankets: United S ta tes; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
Ilorse; p la id ; all w ool: warp and fiUing. both 4 } -c u t ; 21J threads of
warp and 17 picks of filling per in ch ; size, 78x80 inches; weight, 5
pounds.
.. ,
? unit, 1 pound.
me lies ; weignt, :: pouncis.
Per cent
Amount. of total.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials
Cost of materials and all other items except labor....................
Total cost
No. 39 4 .— Blankets: United States; 1 897- unit
W h ite ; best grade; cotton warn and
z s m
31.40
68.60
Cost of materials and all other items except labor...................
80.1000
.3669
21.42
78.58
.4513
....................
80.1417
.3096
100.00
Total cost....................................................................................
. 4669
100.00
i nnnmi
P °un<1-
No. 402.— B lankets: United S ta tes; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
Ilo r s e ; low grad e ; mixed wool and c o tto n ; warp and filling, both
j 4 -c u t; 20 threads of warp and 20 picks of filling per inch ; size, 84x90
inches; weight, 7 pounds.
-a?
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor....................
80.125
. 668
15.76
84.24
Cost of materials and all other items except labor...................
80.0550
.1164
32. O
S
67.91
Total cost....................................................................................
.1714
100. O
C
N ° 7 ^ i l 5 ~ B fa* ? c t8 ' United S ta tes; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
* v " h: t e ’ , mixed Chtton and w ool; warp, 1 0 cu t- fillin’- 1 0 cu t- c
weight? § poSnP
dsand 3 6 Pk'kS ° f m Uns t * * incb = size” 60x72 'inches
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Total cost..................................................................................
89032— 8445
Per cent
of total.
100.00
Total cost............................................................................
Cost of labor in transforming materials...........
Cost of materials and all other items except la bo r___
Amount.
No. 403.— B lankets: United S ta tes; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
H orse; b lue; cotton warp and wool filling; warp, No. 1 0 ; filling,
4 -c u t; 3 2 } threads of warp and 48 picks of filling per inch ; size, 84x90
in ch es; weight, 7 pounds.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
$0.135
. 673
83.29
SO 0714
.
.2209
24.43
75.57
.808
100.00
.2923
100.00
7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
Woolen goods— Continued.
Woolen goods— Continued.
No. 404.— Blankets: Belgium ; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
White ; all w o o l; medium quality.
Amount.
Per cent
of total.
No. 411.— Cloth: United S ta tes; November, 1 S 9 7 ; unit, 1 yard.
C h eviot; 56 inches w ide; weight, 32 ounces per ya rd ; warp yarn,
2-ply No. 24 worsted face and 21-run w o o l; back weft yarn, 23-run
face and 2 -run hack; 8 6 ends of warp and 60 picks of weft per inch.
Amount.
80.0525
.2977
.3502
100.00
Per cent
of total.
14.99
85.01
Amount.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
28.20
71.80
.851
100.00
No. 412.— C loth: United S tates; November, 1897, unit, 1 yard.
C h eviot; 55 inches w ide; weight, 28 ounces per y a rd ; l£-ru n yarn
used in both warp and w e ft; 38 ends of warp and 32 picks of weft
per inch.
Per cent
of total.
6.11
28.00
72.00
1.50
No. 405.— Cloth: United S tates; March, 1 8 9 8 ; unit, 1 yard.
Beaver: 54 inches w ide; weight, 29 ounces per ya rd ; warp yarn. No.
16 colored cotton ; weft yarn,
of 2J run and 5 of 1 run shoddy ; 85
ends of warp and 62 picks of weft per inch.
80.42
1.08
100.00
80.240
No. 406.— C loth: I’ nited S tates; March, 1 8 9 8 ; unit, 1 yard.
Cassimere ; 54 inches w id e : weight, 20A ounces per yard ; warp yarn.
2J run ; weft yarn, 2| run ; 50 ends of warp and 36 picks of weft per
inch.
80.22
.76
80.20
.64
23. 81
76.19
Total cost....................................................................................
.84
Amount.
100.00
No. 407.— Cloth: United S tates; March, 1 8 9 8 ; unit, 1 yard.
Cassim ere; 54 inches wide ; weight, 22 ounces per y a r d ; warp yarn,
2 run ; weft yarn, 21 run ; 50 ends of warp and 36 picks of filling per
inch.
80.2100
.6725
.8825
total cost...........................................................................
23 80
76.20
100.00
No. 408.— Cloth: United States ; 1897 ; unit, 1 yard.
Cassimere ; 54 inches wide ; weight. 26 ounces per yard ; warp yarn,
4 -r u n ; weft yarn, 5-run ; 75 ends of warp and 64 picks of weft per
Inch.
Per cent
of total.
80.15
.38
28.30
71.70
.53
Cost of materials and all other items except labor....................
100.00
No. 414.— C loth: United S ta tes; November, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 yard.
C h evio t; piece dyed: 55 inches w id e; weight, 20 ounces per ya rd ; 2
threads of 3| runs each, doubled and twisted, used in both warp and
w e ft ; 40 ends of warp and 30 picks of w eft per inch.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
Cost ot materials and all other items except labor ...................
100.00
No. 413.— C loth: United S ta tes; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 yard.
C h evio t; half shoddy: 56 inches w id e; weight, 22 ounces per y a rd ;
lg-run yarn is used in both warp and w e ft; 28 ends of warp and 26
ends of weft per inch.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor....................
22.45
77.55
.98
Total cost....................................................................................
Amount.
Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials........................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor....................
80.1688
.5812
22.51
77.49
Total cost....................................................................................
.7500
100.00
No. 415.— Cloth: United S ta te s ; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 yard.
K e r s e y ; high grade; finely finished; 55 inches w id e; weight, 20
ounces per ya rd : 4J-run yarn is used in both warp and w e ft; 48 ends
of warp and' 48 picks of weft per inch.
Per cent
Amount. of total.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials.....................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor....................
80.3654
. 9252
28.31
71.69
80.54
1.21
30.86
69.14
Total cost.........................................................................
1.2906
100.00
1.75
100.00
No. 409.— Cloth: United States ; 1897 ; unit, 1 yard.
Cassimere; 54 inches w ide; weight. 20 ounces per ya rd ; warp yarn,
4 -r u n ; w eft yarn, 5-run ; 60 ends of warp and 52 picks of weft per
inch.
No. 416.— Cloth: United S ta tes; November, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 yard.
K e r s e y ; 55 inches w id e; weight, 27 ounces per y a r d ; warp yarn, 4
run ; weft yarn. 4 j-run face and 2 -run back ; 76 ends of warp and 60
picks of weft per inch.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Total cost............................................................
:
SO.2801
.7172
28.09
71.91
80.38
.81
31.93
68.07
.9973,
Cost of labor in transforming materials..........................................!
Cost of materials and all other items except labor...................... j
100.00
1.19
100.00
No. 410.— C loth: United S tates; 1 8 9 7 : unit, 1 yard.
Cassim ere; 55 inches w ide; weight, 22 ounces per y a rd ; 4J-run yarn,
single, double, and twisted, is used in both warp and w e ft ; 38 ends of
warp and 38 picks of weft per inch.
No. 417.— C loth: United S ta tes; November, 1897 ; unit, 1 yard.
K e r s e y ; piece dyed; 55 inches w id e; weight, 32 ounces per y a rd ;
warp yarn. § of 7 run and h of 2J run ; weft yarn, § of 5 run and J of
2 } run ; 8 8 ends of warp and 6 6 picks of weft per inch.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
80.2163
1.0337
Cost of labor in transforming materials.......................................
80.4202
1.4498
22.47
77.53
1.2500
89032— 8445
17.30
82.70
100.00
Total cost.......................................................... .........................
1.8700
100.00
'
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
8
W oolen goods— Continued.
No. 418.— Cloth: United States ; 1897 ; unit, 1 yard.
K e r s e y ; one-third shoddy; 56 inches w id e; weight, 28 ounces per
yard ; warp yarn, 2 0 ends of 35 run and 2 0 ends of 15 run per inch ;
weft yarn, 2 r u n ; 40 ends of warp and 40 picks of weft per inch.
W oolen goods— -Continued.
No. 425.— Cloth: United S ta te s ; November, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 yard.
Whip co r d ; 55 inches w ide; weight, 22 ounces per ya rd ; warp yarn,
52 run and 9 run, tw isted ; w eft yarn, 4 run ; 98 ends of warp and 40
picks of w eft per inch.
-
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials.....................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor.................
80.288
.860
25.09
74.91
Total cost..................................................................................
1.148
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor....................
S tates; November, 1897 ; unit, 1 yard.
piece dyed; 55 inches w id e ; weight, 32 ounces
of 3 run and 5 of 1 r u n ; weft yarn, 2J run ;
picks of w eft per inch.
80.38
1.18
24.36
75.64
1.56
100.00
No. 419.— Cloth: United
K e r s e y ; half shoddy;
per y a r d ; warp yarn, §
54 ends of warp and 40
Amount. Per cent
of total.
100.00
No. 426.— C loth: United States ; November, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 yard.
W oolen c lo th ; 55 inches w ide; weight, 23 to 24 ounces per yard ;
warp yarn, 2-ply 35 run w o o l; weft yarn, 2-ply ^ w orsted; 30 picks
per inch.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
\
Per cent
Amount. of total.
80.24
Cost of labor in transforming materials.....................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor..................
80.2388
.6112
28.09
71.91
Total cost...................................................................................
.8500
100.00
No. 420.— Cloth: United States ; November, 1897 ; unit, 1 yard.
F r ie ze; 55 inches w ide; weight, 32 ounces per yard ; warp yarn, 3J
ru n ; weft yarn, 15 ru n ; 44 ends of warp and 44 picks of weft per
inch.
1.22
Total cost....................................................................
Total cost.................................................................................. .
1 .0 2
100.00
Total cost....................................................................................
Total cost................................................................................
.9930
Per cent
of total.
80.2233
.5349
29.45
70.55
.7582
100.00
No. 428.— C loth: Great Britain ; 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 yard.
M e lto n ; 54 inches w id e; woolen warp and w e ft; warp No. 1 2 ; weft
No. 12 ; 32 picks per inch.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
80.2026
.4752
29.89
70.11
.6778
Amount. Per cent
of total.
25.67
74.33
100.00
Amount.
No. 421.— C loth: United States ; 1897 ; unit, 1 yard.
M e lto n ; 54 inches w id e ; weight, 28 ounces per ya r d ; warp yarn, 3
r u n ; weft yarn, 31 r u n ; 58 ends of warp and 54 picks of weft per
inch.
SO.2549
.7381
1.46
No. 427.— Cloth: Great Britain ; 1897 ; unit. 1 yard.
C h eviot; 54 inches w id e ; worsted warp and woolen w e ft ; warp 2 fold
No. 10 w orsted; w eft No. 95 and No. 30 tw is t; 20 picks per inch.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
80.26
25.49
.76
Cost of materials and all other items except labor...................
74.51
16.44
83.56
100.00
No. 429.— C loth: Great Britain ; 1897 ; unit, 1 yard.
Undress w o rsted ; 56 inches w ide; woolen warp and w e ft; warp No.
18 ; weft No. 18 ; 50 picks per inch.
100.00
No. 422.— C loth: United S ta te s; November, 1 8 9 7 ; uc it, 1 yard.
ir
T h ib et; 55 inches w ide; weight, 23 ounces per y£ d ; 35 run yarn
used in both warp and w e ft ; 95 ends of warp and 46 picks of weft
per inch.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials.......................................
25.15
74.85
.9569
Amount. Per cent
of total.
80.2407
.7162
100.00
No. 430.— Woolen ya rn : United S ta te s; 1 8 9 7 -9 8 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 1 yarn.
80.32
.80
28.57
71.43
1 .1 2
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
100.00
No. 423.— Cloth: United S tates; November, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 yard.
T h ibet; piece d y e d ; 55 inches w id e; weight, 22 ounces per y a r d ;
warp yarn, 5 run ; weft yarn, 15 run ; 46 ends of warp and 32 picks
of weft per inch.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials.................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor.............
Total cost....................................................................................
80.0260
.4522
5.44
94.56
.4782
100.00
No. 431.— W oolen ya rn : United S ta te s; December, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 2 yarn.
A m o u n t . I P etro te n _
A m ount
of c alt
80.1825
.4675
28.08
71.92
.6500
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor..................
100.00
No. 424.— C loth: United S ta te s; November, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 yard.
T rico t; piece dyed; 32 inches w ide; weight, 3 J ounces per yard :
6 J run yarn used in both warp and w e ft ; 35 ends of warp and 26
picks of weft per inch.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
80.035
.105
.140
89032— 8445
25.00
75.00
100.00
Cost of labor in transforming materials....................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor.
Total cost.
3.0287
.5773
4.74
95.2(5
.6060
100.00
No. 432.— W oolen ya rn : United S tates; November, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 2 yarn.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
80.0800
.2866
21.82
78.18
. 3666
100.00
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
9
Woolen goods— Continued.
Woolen goods— Continued.
No. 441.— Woolen ya rn : United S ta te s ; December, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 6 yarn.
No. 433.— W oolen yarn : United S ta tes; 1 8 9 7 -9 8 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 3 yarn.
Amount.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials........................................
80.0382
.4987
Total cost....................................................................................
.5369
$0.0637
.6218
9.29
90.71
.6355
7.11
92.89
300.00
100.00
No. 434.— W oolen ya rn : United S ta tes; December, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 3 yarn.
Amount.
No. 442.— Woolen ya rn : United States ; 1 8 9 7 -9 8 ; unit, 1 pound.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Per cent
of total.
S . 0941
O
.6025
Cost of labor in transforming materials........................................
Total cost....................................................................................
80.0337
.5788
5.50
94.50
.6125
100.00
100.00
No. 443.— Woolen ya rn : United S ta te s ; November, 1897 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 9 yarn.
Amount.
Per cent
of total.
80.1000
. 3325
Total cost....................................................................................
.6966
Total cost....................................................................................
No. 435.— W oolen ya rn : United S ta tes; November, 1897 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 3£ yarn.
Amount.
13.51
86.49
23.12
76.88
.4325
100.00
No. 43G.— Woolen yarn : United S ta tes; December, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 4 yarn.
Per cent
of total.
SO 1500
.
.6055
.7555
Total cost....................................................................................
19.85
80.15
100.00
No. 8 yarn.
No. 444.— Woolen ya rn : United S ta tes; 1 8 9 7 - 9 8 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 10 yarn.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
SO 1085
.
. 6322
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor...................
SO 0412
.
.59:18
Total cost....................................................................................
.6350
100.00
•
Amount, Per cent
of total.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Total cost...................................................................................
SO.0640
.5469
SO.0700
.1926
No. 44 0 .— Woolen y a m : Belgium ; 1897 ; unit, 1 pound.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
SO 0306
.
.2320
SO.0512
.6133
7.71
92.29
.6645
100.00
No. 439.— Woolen yarn : United S ta tes; November, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 5 i yarn.
Amount. Percent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials.......................................
Total cost..................................................................................
SO 1200
.
.4165
22.37
77.63
.5365
100.00
No. 440.— W oolen yarn: United S ta te s; 1 8 9 7 -9 8 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 6 yarn.
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Cost of labor in transforming materials......................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor...................
SO 0742
.
.5505
1 1.88
8 8 .1 2
Total cost....................................................................................
.6247
100.00
83032— 8445------- 2
CEN SU S
11.65
88.35
.2626
Amount. Per cent
of total.
Total cost...............................................................................
100.00
100.00
No. 438.— W oolen yarn : United S ta tes; December, 1 8 9 7 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 5 yarn.
Cost of labor in transforming materials.......................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor..................
26.66
73.34
.2626
10.48
89.52
.6109
100.00
No. 445.— Woolen ya rn : Belgium ; 1897 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 437.— Woolen yarn : United S ta te s; 1 8 9 7 -9 8 ; unit, 1 pound.
No. 5 yarn.
Cost of labor in transforming materials........................................
Cost of materials and all other items except labor...................
14.65
85.35
.7407
6.49
93.51
100.00
T A B L E S, S H O W IN G PERCENTAGE OF LABOR TO VALU E OF PRODUCT
I X COST OF PRODU CTION .
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, I submit the following tables,
taken from Table 150 of the Abstract of the Census of 1900,
relative to 15 groups of industries. While these tables can not
be called microscopically exact, they certainly comprise the best
evidence available to show the relative return to labor and to
capital affected by the tariff, and in so far as they lack pre
cision are more favorable to capital than to labor, because these
figures were obtained from the reports of manufacturing estab
lishments controlled by capital, and the evidences, therefore, are
out of the mouths o f the manufacturers themselves, but are
based on watered stocks, and cover returns to capital contained
in salaries and miscellaneous items which can not be determined.
These tables which I shall submit will show the capital al
leged to be invested in 1890, 1900, and 1905, with the expenses,
including salaries of officers, amounts paid in wages, amounts
paid under the head of “ Miscellaneous,” and the amount paid
for “ materials,” with the value of the product and the profit,
showing the percentage of profit to capital and the percentage
paid to labor out of the proceeds of labor, and the percentage
of wages to the increase o f value by manufacture.
I have been compelled to make these compilations, and am in
debted for the calculations to Mr. Josiah H. Shinn, of Washing
10
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
ton, a statistical expert of high standing, and to Mr. J. J. Mc
Coy, Actuary of the United States Treasury. The Census Bureau
neglected to point out in its tables the comparative reward of
capital and labor, and I have done so, in order to show the
truth with regard to it.
Neither the Committee on Finance nor the Committee on
Mays and Means in the House has seen fit to furnish this in
formation to the country, and yet only in this direction and
by like methods and tables can be determined “ the difference
in cost of labor or of production at home and abroad” on which
this tariff bill is falsely pretended to be drawn.
The percentage of labor is worked out in every one of the
great tables affecting the 14 groups of industries in the United
States from details gathered with infinite care from the manu
facturer himself, and are therefore as favorable to him as
they might naturally be expected to be. A very interesting
ratio of the relative wages is found in these tables; that is to
say, that under this high prohibitive tariff, engendering mo
nopolies, the result has followed which might be expected to
follow—that labor continually receives a diminishing share of
that which it produces. For instance, taking the textile indus
try, in 1890 labor received 22 per cent of the gross product;
in 1902 it received 20.8 per cent of the gross product; and in
1905 it received 19.5 per cent. So it will be found all through
these tables that the monopolies which have been built up upon
these tariffs have gradually diminished the par1, which labor
;
receives.
Look at these wonderful tables, showing the profits of the
various manufacturers of the country by groups o f industries.
Remember the enormous stock-watering operations shown by
Moody's Manual and by Poor's Manual and the corporation
statistics of the last,fifteen years, and then consider what it
means when this watered capital on food products pays 1G.4
per cent interest, with a fairly estimated profit, considering
water, of 32 per cent; on textiles, o f 12 per cent, which fairly
estimated profit of 24 per cent; on iron and steel, of 10.G per
cent, which would be probably 30 per cent; on lumber, of 18.7
per cent, and probably o f nearly 50 per cent; on the industries
of leather, 13.5 per cent, when it should be at least three times
that; and so all through the list.
These monopolies are shown to have the certain enormous
rates of profits which these tables point out. These tables necesShi ^ inc\ (te a multitude of companies whose profits are reason
U
able and just in every respect, who are not monopolists, who are
doing business on a fair competitive market, so that the profits
or monopoly are the special profits which swell this total to a
and which stand above, and far above, the averages
winch are given. When there is also taken into consideration
tne fact that on a physical valuation they would not have prob1 ,, y one-third of the capital invested which they pretend to
the * ^ tlleir caPhal stock; when it is remembered that under
1
rn eth i °* sa*aiaes and miscellaneous expenses and other artful
h . 0< 3 of hookkeeping the earnings of these monopolies are
? secretly used and concealed and being invested in vari;
° lms of property, it is no exaggeration to say that the earn•
i
,UJ)aysical valuation are probably three times what they
Pat Pt0 be ° n the face of the census reports.
theJ> t/ KiSideilt’ \ Ca^ *ke attention of Senators in considering
UniVmi
an? invite them to remember that since 1890 the
n,„W !n „ ates ,. as sone through the most remarkable stockthn
lon that tlle civilized world has ever seen. And
■^°VDer ° f laljor and of public franchises has been
litl ,
m, a multitude of monopolies, which have been estab.
x ^ mhmmg competing enterprises into single companies,
A
‘ L . 1 e the capital of 1890 was in a large measure watered
:
'
’ *.,.1S Pr°bably no exaggeration to say that the capital of
average probably 66 per cent of “ w a te r;” so that
en you consider the percentage or profit on the capital in
these tables it should be at least doubled and should be prob
ably trebled to give a fair estimate.
w£ n°tker Mem which should be kept in mind is that the men
pnf(<
rTV)!ni«1?-oT?nrii0rateT0rg?L
nizations can allow themselves such
, om.ous lewards under the head of salaries that this item is
also an important additional item in favor of capital With
this explanation, it will be seen that labor's share of the return
of the work done in this aggregate group of all the great ffidustnes relating to manufactured products is very small and
after supplying the necessaries of life, leaves labor no surplus ’
the profit of capital, confessedly, is 16.4 per cent.
P
’
Now, Mr. President, I submit a tabulated abstract showing
the profits of capital conceded; also a table o f estimated profits
and a table of probable profits in the 14 great groups of our
national industries.
8903S— 8445
T H E M E AN IN G OF WORDS USED IN T H E T ABL ES.
Salaries.—Covers the salaries of officials, salesmen, book
keepers, clerks, stenographers; in some cases, superintendents
and foremen.
Wages.—The word “ wages ” means the wages of workingmen.
Miscellaneous.—Means (see Special Report of Census, Manu
factures, vol. 1, 1905, p. xcix) :
1. Amount paid for rent of factory or works.
2. Amount paid for taxes, not including internal revenue.
3. Amount paid for rent of offices and buildings other than
factory or works, and for interest, insurance, internal-revenue
tax, ordinary repairs of buildings and machinery, advertising,
traveling expenses, and all other sundry expenses not reported
under the head of “ Materials.”
Materials.—The word “ materials,” page ci, means:
1. Cost of components of the product.
2. Cost of fuel, oil, and waste.
3. Packing boxes, and materials to make them.
4. Mrrapping paper.
5. Freights paid by the manufacturers.
6. Rent of power and heat.
The salaried officials include the administration force,
whether o f sales, manufacturing, purchasing, advertising, or
mail orders (p. lxxiv).
See Exhibit I.
E x h i b i t I.
Summary of manufactures by fourteen groups o f industries.
[Special Census Report, Manufactures, pt. 1, 1905, p. 28 et s e q .;
Twelfth Census, 1900, Manufactures, pt. 1, p. 20 et seq., and pp.
cxliv and c x lv ; with special calculations hy Josiah H . Shinn and
J. J. McCoy, actuary of United States Treasury.]
1905.
1.
Food-products industries:
Capital..........................................
1900.
1890.
$1,173,151,276
$940,889,838
$507,678,328
Expenses—
$51,455,814
Officers............................- —
$164,601,813
W a g e s...................................
$131,773,642
Miscellaneous-........- ............
Materials............. ................. $2,304,416,564
$39,313,664
$129,910,070
$77,936,1S5
$1,839,256,143
$33,313,664
$90,373,450
$52,936,982
$1,318,963,830
T o t a l ......................... $2,652,248,833
$192,986,067
Profit..............................................
$2,086,466,062
$191,235,948
$1,495,5*7,926
$140,609,265
Gross product............................. $2,845,234,900
16.4
Per cent profit on capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross prod5.7
uct, per cent.............................
$2,277,702,010
$1,636,197,191
27.6
5.7
5.5
Value of gross output............... $2,845,234,900
Cost of materials...................... $2,304,416,564
$2,277,702,010
$1,839,250,143
$1,636,197,191
$1,318,963,830
$540,818,336
Increase in value.............
$164,601,813
Cost of labor...............................
Per cent of cost of labor to
30.4
increase in value....................•
2. Textile industries:
Capital.......................................... $1,744,169,234
$438,445,867
$129,910,070
$317,233,361
$90,373,450
33.7
35.1
$1,366,604,058
SI,008,050,268
Expenses—
$69,281,415
Officers....................................
$419,841,630
W ages....................................
$199,066,264
Miscellaneous........................
Materials............................... $1,246,562,061
$49,982,357
$341,734,399
$128,481,214
$895,984,795
$35,496,483
$278,167,769
$78,401,675
$705,004,909
T otal................................... $1,934,751,370
$212,690,048
Profit..............................................
$1,416,182,766
$221,301,713
$1,097,073,839
$164,598,665
Gross product............................. $2,147,441,418
12
Per cent profit on capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross prod
19.5
uct, per cent............. ...............
$1,637,484,484
16.1
$1,261,672,504
16.3
Value of gross output............... $2,147,441,418
Cost of materials...................... $1,246,562,061
$1,637,484,484
$895,984,796
_ _ _ __7
ip G , o , oi
JG
$419,811,630
Cost of labor-------------------------Per cent of cost of labor to
46.6
increase in value...................
3. Iron and steel industries:
Capital-........................................ $2,331,498,157
20
2 0 .8
.
$741,428,CSS
$341,734,399
46.1
22
$1,261,672,504
$705,004,909
$550,667,595
$278,167,769
50
$1,528,979,076
$997,872,483
Expenses—
$100,444,683
Officers..................................
$482,357,508
W ages----------------- ---------$166,896,587
Miscellaneous........................
Materials............................... $1,179,981,458
$58,090,781
$3S1,875,490
$91,492,127
$987,198,370
$36,583,536
$285,351,714
$57,694,853
$617,554,226
T otal................................... $1,929,680,234
$247,059,492
Profit.............................................
$1,518,656,777
$274,834,131
$997,184,329
$146,872,208
Gross product............................. $2,176,739,726 $1,793,490,908
1 0 .6
17.9
Per cent profit on capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross prod
2 1 .2
22.10
uct, per cent.............................
i------------------------
$1,144,056,537
14.7
24.9
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
Summary of manufactures by fourteen groups o f industries— Continued.
1905.
8.
1890.
$1,793,490,908
$987,198,370
$1,144,056,537
$617,554,226
$806,292,538
$526,502,311
8.
Increase in value............
Cost of labor----------------- -------Per cent of cost of labor to
increase in value....................
4. Lumber industries:
Capital..........................................
48.5
45
46
$1,013,827,138
$946,116,515
$844,418,472
Expenses—
0 fflcers...................................
Wages.....................................
Miscellaneous.....................
Materials...............................
$48,571,861
$336,058,173
$130,850,824
$518,908,150
$28,962,927
$212,201,768
$42,142,321
$561,501,302
$30,863,184
$201,558,706
$45,510,782
$462,658,350
T otal............... ................... $1,034,389,009
Profit.............................................
$189,341,328
$844,828,318
$186,073,261
$740,591,022
$137,363,898
Gross product............. - .............. $1,223,730,336
Per cent profit on capital stock.
18.7
Labor’s share of gross product, per cent.............................
27.4
$1,030,906,579
19.6
$877,954,920
16.2
2 0 .6
22.9
Value of gross output............... $1,223,730,336
Cost of materials......................
$518,908,150
$1,030,906,579
$561,501,302
$877,954,920
$462,658,350
$469,405,277
$212,201,768
$415,296,570
$201,558,706
Increase in value.............
Cost of labor............. ................
Per cent of cost of labor to
increase in value....................
5. Leather industries:
Capital..........................................
Summary of manufactures by fourteen groups of industries— Continued.
1905.
1900.
Iron and steel industries—Continued.
Value of gross output............... $2,176,739,728
Cost of materials
-------------- $1,179,981,458
$996,758,268
$482,357,503
$704,822,186
$336,058,173
II
1900.
Chemicals and allied products:
Capital.......................................... $1,504,728,510
1890.
$198,390,219'
$322,543,674
$49,864,233
$93,965,248
$128,879,323
$609,351,160
$26,335,164
$43,870,002
$19,825,945
$356,192,334
$14,171,587
$33,872,540
$29,508,992
$239,915,791
$882,059,964
$149,905,299
$476,224,045
$76,607,832
$117,468,913
$62,587,534
Gross product________________ $1,031,965,263
Per cent profit on capital stock.
9.9
Labor’s share of gross prodnet, per cent.............................
8
$552,891,877
15.3
$380,056,497
19.4
7.9
8.9
Value of gross ou tp u t............. $1,031,955,263
$609,351,160
Cost of materials......................
$552,891,877
$353,192,334
$380,056,497
$239,915,794
Increase in value...........
Cost of labor...............................
Per cent of cost of labor to
$422,614,103
$93,965,248
$196,699,543
$13,870,602
$140,140,703
$13,872,510
Expenses—
Officers............................. ......
Wages.............................. .
Miscellaneous............. - ........
Materials.............................
T o t a l ........................... .
Profit.............................................
2 2 .2
22.3
°A 0
9. Clay, glass, and stone produets:
Capital..........................................
$553,846,682
$350,902,367
$217,383,297
Expenses—
O f f i c e r s ..............................
Wages----------------------------- Miscellaneous........................
Materials...............................
$21,555,724
$148,471,903
$37,822,036
$123,124,392
$13,718,966
$109,022,582
$19,185,657
$01,615,281
$11,370,622
$90,541,771
$14,094,740
$68,990,146
47.7
45.2
48.5
$440,777,194
$343,600,513
$246,795,713
T otal.................... .............
Profit.............................................
$330,974,055
$60,256,367
$236,542,483
$57,021,749
$184,997,279
$44,808,724
Expenses—
Officers....................................
Wages........... .........................
Miscellaneous........... ..........
Materials...............................
$18,372,723
$116,694,140
$40,737,343
$471,112,921
$14,186,690
$99,759,885
$22,942,594
$395,551,232
$15,348,267
$98,432,593
$18,587,831
$294,446,011
Gross product.............................
Per cent profit on capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross product, per cent............................
$391,230,422
$293,564,235
16.2
$229,806,003
1 0 .8
37.1
37.4
39.3
T otal...................................
Profit.............................................
$846,917,126
$58,830,344
$5.32,440,401
$51,290,645
$126,814,702
$80,741,328
Value of gross output...............
Cost of materials......................
$391,230,422
$123,124,392
$293,564,235
$94,615,281
$229,806,003
$68,990,146
Gross product.............................
Per cent profit on capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross product, per cent.............................
$705,747,470
13.3
$583,731,046
14.9
$487,556,030
24.6
$268,106,030
$148,471,903
$198,9-18,954
$109,022,582
$160,815,357
$90,541,771
16.5
16.9
20.1
55.4
54.8
50.3
Value of gross output...............
Cost of materials......................
$705,747,470
$471,112,921
$58.3,731,046
$395,551,232
$487,5.56,030
$294,446,011
Increase in value.............
Cost of labor........................ ......
Per cent of cost of labor to
increase in value..................
10. Metals and metal products
other than iron and steel:
Capital..........................................
$598,340,758
$410,646,057
$204,285,820
Expenses:
Officers_____ ______ _____ _
Wages....................................
Miscellaneous........................
Materials...............................
$24,854,590
$117,599,837
$41,595,062
$641,367,583
$16,059,191
$96,749,051
$21,295,403
$196,979,368
$14,924,917
$64,055,644
$14,731,078
$179,160,940
Total...................................
Profit.............................................
$828,417,072
$93,845,384
$631,083,019
$117,712,445
$272,881,579
$44,026,571
Gross product.............................
Per cent profit on capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross product, per cent..............................
$922,262,456
15.6
$748,795,464
28.6
$316,908,150
21.5
12.7
12.9
20.4
Value of gross output...............
Cost of materials......... ...........
$922,262,456
$644,367,083
$748,795,461
$196,979,368
$316,908,150
$179,169,940
Increase in value.............
Cost o f labor............... ...............
Per cent o f cost of labor to
increase in value.................... .
11. Tobacco:
Capital..........................................
$277,894,873
$117,599,837
$251,816,096
$96,749,051
$137,738,210
$64,055,644
42.3
38.4
46.5
$323,9S3,501
$124,089,871
$93,094,753
Expenses—
Officers....................................
Wages.....................................
Miscellaneous........................
Materials...............................
SS,800,434
$62,640,303
$S0,145,O16
$126,088,608
$8,951,534
$19,852,4S4
$79,495,422
$107,182,656
$10,241,271
$44,550,735
$37,551,631
$92,304,317
T otal...................................
$277,674,361
$53,443,320
$245,182,090
$37,594,450
$184,658,004
$27,083,619
Gross product.............................
Per cent profiton capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross product, per cent.............................
$331,117,681
16.4
$283,076,546
30.2
$211,746,C23
28.1
18.9
17.6
Value of gross output...............
Cost of materials......................
$331,117,681
$126,088,608
$2S3,076,546
$107,182,658
$211,746,023
$92,304,317
Increase in value.............
Cost of labor...............................
Per cent o f cost of labor to
increase in value....................
12. Vehicles for land transportstion:
Capital..........................................
$205,029,073
$62,640,303
$175,803,890
$49,852,434
$119,442,306
$44,550,735
30.5
28.3
37.3
$4-47,697,020
$398,778,072
$248,224,770
Expenses—
Officers....................................
W ages....................................
$24,334,118
$221,800,517
$15,191,444
$164,614,781
$11,172,134
HIS, 212,379
Increase in value.............
Cost o f labor------------- -------- Per cent of cost of labor to
increase in value....................
8 . Paper and printing:
Capital..........................................
$234,634,549
$116,694.1,10
$188,179,814
$99,750,885
49.7
53
51
$79S,758,312
$557,610,887
$344,003,723
$48,974,138
$i40,092,453
$76,069,66.3
$214,158,423
$34,625,9S6
$117,611,864
$59,524,277
$149,597,579
$193,110,019
$9S,432,593
Expenses—
Officers....................................
Wages.................... ...............
Miscellaneous............... ........
Materials...............................
$S1,808,311
$185,547,791
$138,245,437
$308,209,655
T otal...................................
Profit..............................................
$713,811,194
$143,301,062
$479,294,677
$127,023,091
$361,359,706
$84,227,724
Gross product.............................
Per cent profit on capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross product, per cent.............................
$857,112,256
17.9
$005,317,76S
22.7
$445,587,430
24.4
2 1 .6
23.1
26.5
Value of gross output...............
Cost of materials-....................
$857,112,256
$308,209,655
$606,317,768
$214,158,423
$445,587,430
$149,597,579
Increase in value.............
Cost of labor...............................
Per cent of cost of labor to
increase in value....................
7. Liquors and beverages:
Capital......................................
$548,902,601
$1S5,547,791
$392,159,345
$140,092,453
$295,989,851
$117,611,864
33.8
35.7
39.7
*
$659,547,620
$534,101,049
$310,002,635
Expenses—
Officers....................................
W a g e s .................................
Miscellaneous........................
Materials...............................
$21,421,353
$45,146,285
$223,416,420
$139,854,147
$16,893,405
$36,946,557
$188,754,387
$122,218,073
$11,118,673
$29,140,916
$117,046,590
$109,830,410
T otal............... ...................
Profit.............................................
$429,868,205
$71,398,400
$364,812,422
$60,691,745
$267,13G,589
$74,018,772
Gross product.............................
Per cent profit on capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross product, per cent.....................
$501,266,605
1 0 .8
$425,504,167
11.3
$341,155,861
$3.8
8.9
8 .6
8.5
Value of gross output..........
Cost of materials...................
$501,266,605
$139,854,147
$425,504,167
$122,218,073
$341,155,361
$109,830,410
Increase in value.............
Cost of labor...............................
Per cent of cost of labor to
Increase In value.................... .
$361,412,458
$45,146,285
$303,286,094
$36,946,557
$231,324,951
$29,140,916
12.5
1 2 .3
1 2 .6
89032— 8445
Profit.............................................
20.6
2
1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
12
Summary of manufactures by fourteen groups of industries— Continued.
1900.
1905.
12. Vehicles for land transporta
tion—Continued.
Expenses—Continued.
Miscellaneous.......................
Materials_______ _____ ___
Summary of manufactures by fourteen groups of industries— Continued.
1890.
If SO
.
13. Shipbuilding—Continued.
Labor’s share of gross prod
uct, per cent.............................
35.2
33.3
36.7
Value of gross output...............
Cost of materials...................... .
$82,769,239
$37,463,179
$74,578,158
$33,483,772
$40,342,115
$46,925,109
$45,306,060
$29,241,087
$41,091,383
$24,839,163
$23,417,006
$14,833,977
$29,107,649
$334,244,377
$19,842,332
$268,278,205
$9,460,374
$174,624,639
Total.
Profit.
$609,486,661
$34,437,781
$467,926,762
$40,722,367
$313,469,526
$31,006,717
Gross product.............................
Per cent profit on capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross prod
uct, per cent.............................
$643,924,442
7.0
$508,649,129
1 0 .2
$344,476,243
12.4
34.4
32.4
34.3
Increase in value.............
Cost of labor............. .................
Per cent of cost of labor to
increase in value......................
14. Miscellaneous:
Capital..........................................
Value of gross output.
Cost of materials.........
$643,924,442
$334,244,377
$508,649,129
$268,278,205
$344,476,243
$174,624,639
Expenses—
O dicers....................................
Wages.....................................
$309,680,065
$221,800,517
$240,370,924
$164,614,781
$169,851,604
$118,212,379
71.0
08.5
69.6
Increase in value.............
Cost of labor.............................
Per cent of cost of labor to
increase in value............... .
13. Shipbuilding:
Capital........................................ .
1900.
1905.
$121,623,700
$77,362,701
$53,393,074
Expenses—
Officers.............
Wages..............
Miscellaneous.
Materials........
$3,339,741
$29,241,087
$5,255,506
$37,463,179
$2,008,537
$24,839,163
$3,685,661
$33,483,77t
$1,194,870
$14,833,977
$1,392,551
$16,925,109
TotalProfit.
$75,299,513
$7,469,726
$64,020,133
$10,558,025
$34,346,507
$5,995,608
Gross product.................
Per cent profit on capital stock
$82,769,239
$74,578,15$
13.6
$40,342,115
6 .1
. 64.5
60.4
63.3
$974,316,571
$1,348,920,721
$708,870,920
$50,655,229
$187,514,312
$101,198,364
$460,205,501
$49,199,283
$202,745,162
$81,933,611
$490,073,705
$33,303,252
$133,643,444
$49,025,323
$ DO,231,851
T otal...................................
Profit..............................................
$799,573,493
$142,031,457
$823,952,701
$180,139,533
$519,233,870
$123,310,583
Gross product.............................
Per cent profit on capital stock.
Labor’s share of gross prod
uct, per cent.............................
$941,004,873
14.5
$1,004,092,294
13.3
$345,574,453
16.4
19.9
24.6
21.1
Value of gross output...............
Cost of m aterials....................
$941,604,873
$460,205,501
$1,004,092,294
$490,073,705
$345,574,453
$309,231,851
Increase in value.............
Cost of labor____ ____________
Per cent of cost of labor to
increase in value....................
$481,309,372
$187,514,312
$514,018,589
$202,746,102
$345,342,692
$136,643,444
38.9
39.4
39.5
Materials...............................
11.2
Average percentage of wages to labor compared to gross product in the U great classes of industries.
---------- _ ---------------------------------------------
Profit on
capital,
1905.
Industries.
Ratio of wages to gross product.
1905.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Food products........... ........... ......................
Textiles........... ...............................................
Iron and steel------------------------- ----- —
Lumber............................................................
Leather............................................................
Paper and printing......................................
Liquors and beverages................................
Chemicals and allied products...................
Clay, glass, and stone................................
Metal and metal products other than
iron and steel...................................... .......
Tobaee ............. .......................- .................
Vehicles for land transportation-----------Shipbuilding...................................................
Miscellaneous-------------- -------- ------------------
For full details see Exhibit 1.
and value of products.
16.4
12
1 0 .6
18.7
13.3
17.9
1 0 .8
9.9
5.7
19.5
22.1
27.4
13.5
21.6
8.9
1900.
5.7
16.9
23.1
20.1
8 .6
7.9
37.4
15.6
16.4
7.6
b .l
14.5
12.7
13.9
31.4
85.2
19.9
12.9
17.6
32.4
33.3
24.6
8
24.9
22.9
26.5
8.5
8.9
39.3
20.4
21
34.3
36.7
21.1
Per cent of
labor
wages to
product.
32.8
24
2 0 .6
49.2
36
31.8
56.1
39.9
53.7
32.4
29.7
32.4
31.2
32.8
15.2
2 2 .8
21.2
37.4
26.6
35.8
2 0 .6
19.8
12.2
29
46.8
49.2
18.3
43.5
5.7
19.5
Per cent of wages to increase of
value in manufactured by la
bor.
1905.
8.9
30.4
46.6
48.5
47.7
49.7
33.8
12.5
8
2 2 .2
22.1
27.4
16.5
2 1 .6
1900.
1890.
33.7
40.1
45
45.2
53
35.7
35.1
50
46
48.5
51
39.7
1 2 .2
1 2 .6
37.1
55.4
22.3
54.8
24.2
56.3
12.7
18.9
34.4
35.2
19.9
42.3
30.5
71.6
64.5
38.9
88.4
28.3
68.5
60.4
39.4
46.5
37.3
69.6
63.3
39.5
Average rate of wages to gross product in all industries, 17.8 per cent, calculating from table of totals of wages
R E L A T IV E LABOR COST.
Mr. OWEN. The first important deduction shown from these
tables is the relative cost of labor as compared with the gross
product. It is less than G per cent in food products, and yet
the tariff on food products is an average of 32 per cent, in order
to measure the cost o f difference at home and abroad.
The total labor cost in textiles is 19.5 per cent, and yet the
tariff in this bill on flax manufactures is over 44 per cent, on
cotton manufactures over 47 per cent, on wool manufactures
over 58 per cent, and on silk manufactures over G per cent to
O
measure the difference in the cost of production at home and
abroad; a patent and ridiculous fraud on its face, .vliicliJms not
been explained, which will not be explained, and w h ic h can not
be explained by the managers o f this bill, and so it goes all
through this table.
The total percentage of the value of the product paid in wages
in textiles is 19.5 per cent.
If we concede that the labor cost in Europe is absolutely
nothing; if we concede that the foreigner would not have to
pay any freight to bring his goods to America, would pay noth
ing for*ocean insurance, for breakage, wharfage, dockage, leak
age. rattage, or stealage, still 19.5 per cent would be high enough
to protect the American manufacturer on an average.
Granting, however, that the European laborer earns half
as much, then one-half of 19.5 per cent would be sufficient.
Granting that the American laborer has twice the efficiency
of the European laborer, then no tariff whatever is necessary to
89032—8445
5.5
22
37.1
Probable
profit on
capital.
1890.
2 0 .8
21.2
20.6
1 0 .8
Estimated
profit on
capital.
protect the American manufacturer; and granting that the
wages paid in Europe buy more of manufactured products and
as much of food products as in America, the European manu
facturer would be entitled to a bonus from his home government
to put him on a parity with the American manufacturer.
In some cases a duty is necessary for protective purposes, but
the cases are few- and the rate not high. A tariff for revenue
intelligently drawn will be more than three times as high as a
tariff for pure protection drawn in a spirit of perfect honesty.
If the Finance Committee can show any justification for the
schedules on the basis of the “ difference of the cost of produc
tion at home and abroad,” I am willing to concede this measure
of incidental protection under a tariff for revenue, but to con
ceal the facts, to refuse to hear, to ridicule the inquiry, and
ignore the facts when proven is surely indefensible.
This abstract briefly exhibits the ratio of wages to gross
products and affords a basis of comparison with the ratio of
wages to gross products in countries competing with ours. This
supplies a basis for a generalization showing the difference in
the cost of production at home and abroad.
It will be seen, for example, that the average ratio of wages
paid to the gross product in the textile industry averages 19.5
per cent, less than 20 per cent. The difference in the wage
cost in the United States and abroad, conceding that the for
eign workman receives a wage only half of that paid the Ameri
can workman and conceding that he is equally efficient and
conceding that his wages (half in money) has a purchasing
power of half the wages of the American workman, the differ-
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
ence in the cost of production based on such wages would be an
average of less than 10 per cent.
But it is not true that the wages paid foreign workmen
buys only half as much, but the fact is that every dollar paid
the foreign workman buys at least 50 per cent more than the
dollar paid the American workman, so that $10 paid an Euro
pean workman is equivalent to $15 in purchasing power in the
United States.
So that the difference in the amount paid in wages because
of this factor as compared to the value of the gross product
is less than an average of 10 per cent, as above estimated.
Another factor of vitin importance is the superior efficiency
of the American workman. Ten dollars paid to him turns out
twice as much goods as that paid the European workman;
consequently the difference in wages compared to gross product
is not only not against the American workman, but it is in his
favor, although he does not get the benefit of it from the man
who employs him.
It is not surprising, in view of these calculations based upon
our national statistics and well-established facts, that the man
agers in charge of this bill dare not answer the question wheth
er this bill is being written in accordance with the pledge of
the party that the rates should be determined by the differ
ence in the cost of production at home and abroad.
The monopolist can not and does not consume his profit. So
that the result is that the capital of monopoly is rolling up like
a huge snowball, picking up every opportunity offered by God
to mankind in our natural resources—the forests, the mines,
the water powers, the highways, and the land, both of city and
of the countryside; and labor, the creator of wealth, languishes
and grows weaker as the creature of wealth grows stronger and
exercises a natural but unrestrained appetite by “ acquiring ”
the title to every visible and invisible natural resource.
Mr. President, I am a firm friend of capital and always ready
to befriend its just rights. I believe in giving it safety and
stability, protecting it in its right to earn a fair reward upon its
employment. It is of great importance that the incentive should
be removed neither from the capitalist nor from the business
man who uses capital nor from the laborer who is employed by
capital, but I do not believe that all of the net proceeds of human
labor and every opportunity of human life should be appro
priated by capital and all the reasonable opportunities o f life
cut off from millions of wage-earners who have no more wisdom
or knowledge of how to protect themselves against the crafty
schemes of monopoly than if they were so many blind girl
babies. The Senate and the Senators on this floor, it seems to
me, are under a solemn personal responsibility to find the way
to protect the weaker elements o f society, and they ought not to
write the laws of this country to serve monopoly at the expense
of the defenseless citizen wage-earner.
The incentive ought not to be taken away from capital; neither
should the incentive be taken away from the small business man
who may be crushed by gigantic organizations of capital, and
above all the incentive of a reasonable reward, of a reasonable
return for labor, of the power to support a family by labor, in
dustry, and providence. The power to have some leisure for
playtime should not be taken away from the American working
man or t<he American working woman or the American working
child by the grinding process of unthinking corporate monopoly.
Under the head of “ Miscellany ” are concealed many items
favorable to capital by increasing the capital itself under color
of repairs, and so forth.
The estimate of the profit on capital is also too small, because
more than half of the capital claimed is water.
All of the return on capital, except a small percentage, neces
sary to provide for a reasonable return on capital, is a net
profit, while the return on labor contains no net profit worth
mentioning, although it is true that by long, hard hours of
labor, great deprivation, rigid economy, and careful saving, the
labor classes, through the savings banks exhibit a considerable
accumulation out o f the proceeds of their labor.
Statistics of the savings hanks of the United States for 1906.
[Comptroller Currency Report, 1907.]
Total
depositors.
Amount of
deposits. .
Aver
age.
2,987,201
3,562,804
31,598
1,087,746
357,783
Total United States___________________
82032— 8445
$1,168,148,705
1,656,905,727
6,143,167
385,503,885
285,435,714
$391.04
405.06
194.41
354.41
741.89
8,027,192
3,482,137,198
433.79
13
The savings under forty years o f high-protective tariff aver
age $433.79 to those who have been able to save, and these fig
ures include hundreds o f millions of the savings of the well-todo and many of the capital class, but only one person in ten,
after all, has a savings account, and the savings between the
laboring people and actual want will not average $43 per capita
for our entire productive population, counting all savings as the
savings of labor, while many millions are utterly defenseless
against the exactions of capital.
When it is remembered what the enormous product of the
labor of the average American workman is—$2,500 per annum—
it will be observed that these savings of many years comprise
but a small part of the proceeds of labor.
In the table exhibited—the industries engaged in “ food prod
ucts ”— labor's share o f the gross product is very small, because
of the very large amount of raw material used, out of which
labor had previously been paid in the process of production.
The same thing is relatively true of the industries dealing
with liquors and beverages.
It is also true that labor’s share in lumber and iron and
steel, and clay, glass, and stone products, and in vehicles and
shipbuilding reaches a high percentage relative to the product,
for the simple reason that nearly all of the value in lumber,
outside o f the stumpage, is pure labor. Labor goes into the
woods, cuts the tree down, hauls it to the mill, puts it on the
runway, saws the log, planes it, stacks the lumber, and puts
the lumber on the car. Capital, having acquired the land, fur
nishes the sawmill, and permits labor to have a part of its own
profits in wages, but no more than labor can command in a
free, competitive market for labor.
The same thing is true with regard to clay products. The
workman digs the clay out o f the ground, puts it through every
process with the work of his hands, and converts it into a
finished product. Capital, having acquired the title to the clay,
permits the workmen to dig upon the earth, owned by the capi
talist, and furnishes the workmen with tools, and pays the
workmen precisely as much, and no more, as his labor com
mands in a free, competitive, labor market.
The laborer has a very narrow margin, and unless he be ex
ceptional in self-denial, in providence, and is free from accident
or sickness or other incidental loss, he may, perhaps, save
enough to lift himself from the severe conditions which so en
viron him to a more fortunate place where he can join the
capital class and get the benefits of a system which is well de
vised to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.
T H E H IG H T A R IF F H A S LOW ERED T H E W AG ES OF A M E R IC A N W O R K M E N .
Mr. President, the advocates of a high tariff have always pro
fessed, and I suppose usually felt, the greatest solicitude for
the welfare of the laboring man, and have believed, or appeared
to believe, that a high tariff would protect the American labor
ing man against the injurious competition of the “ pauper
labor ” of Europe. I shall show by our own statistics that the
icagcs of the American tvorkman have been lowered under the
operation of this tariff.
Wages are not valued alone by dollars and cents; dollars
change in purchasing power, depending on the number of dollars
put in circulation in any given country and the intimacy of its
commercial relations with other countries, and the whole world
is confused in the question of prices by the grossly unequal dis
tribution of currency in the different nations of the world; a
great problem, which is now undergoing and will undergo a more
rapid readjustment under the fast increasing improvement of
rapid modern intercourse.
Attention is expressly called to the fact that labor’s share of
the proceeds of labor has not increased in the highly protected
industries—it has decreased.
In the textile industries labor received 22 per cent of the gross
product in 1890, 20.8 in 1900, and 19.5 in 1905.
In iron and steel labor received 24.9 per cent in 1890 and 22.1
per cent in 1905.
In leather goods labor received 21.1 per cent of the proceeds
of labor in 1890, 16.9 per cent in 1900, and 16.5 per cent in 1905.
In paper and printing labor received 26.5 per cent of the pro
ceeds of labor in 1890, 23.1 per cent in 1900, 21.6 per cent in
1905.
In chemical and allied products labor received 8.9 per cent in
1890, 8 per cent in 1905.
In clay, glass, and stone products labor received 39.3 per cent
in 1890, 37.1 per cent in 1900.
In metal and metal products, other than iron and steel, labor
received 20.4 per cent in 1890 and 12.7 per cent in 1905.
In tobacco labor received 21 per cent in 1890 and 18.9 per cent
in 1905.
In shipbuilding labor received 36.7 per cent in 1890 and 35.2
per cent in 1905.
14
CONGEESSIONAL RECORD
In miscellaneous industries labor received 21.1 per cent in
1890 and 19.9 per cent in 1905.
It is perfectly obvious that under the high tariff the reward
of labor has diminished relatively to the gross product of labor.
When we compare the increase o f the value o f products,
the increase o f the cost of materials, and the number o f wage-
earners, and the total wages between 1890 and 1900, we find that
the growth o f capital value corresponding with that of the value
o f products is decidedly more than the increase of total wages;
that the average wage for all classes of wage-earners, in dol
lars and cents, is less in 1900 than in 1890. The increase of earn
ings is 25 per cent; that of wages only a little over 22 per cent.
Number of
wageTotal wages.
earners.
*
Capital
value.
Value of
products.
Cost of ma
terials.
$9,813,834,390
6,525,050,759
$13,000,149,359
9,372,378,843
$7,343,627,875
5,162,013,878
5,306,143
4,251,535
$2,320,988,168
1,891,903,795
3,288,783,631
3,627,770,316
2,181,613,997
1,054,608
428,984,373
Nineteen hundred average wage, $437; annual weekly wage,
$S.60, to support 3 people, a labor loss of 10 per cent in wages
relative to value o f product.
The percentage o f wages to value o f products was 17.8 per
cent in 1900, 20.2 per cent in 1890, a loss for labor of 10 per cent.
Here is an increase o f $3,627,740,316 in the value of the prod
ucts of labor under the “ value of products,” and $42S,984,373
goes to 1,054,60S additional laborers, while $3,19S,755,943 is the
net value o f the products of such labor. One million fifty-four
thousand six hundred and eight new workmen get $428,984,373
with which to sustain approximately 3,000,000 people; to feed,
clothe, and shelter them; leaving no surplus for enforced idle
ness, sickness, accident, or death; and a vast profit goes to
capital that does not have the same exacting demands for food
and clothing. The annual weekly wage is only $8.60 to sup
port three people. How does this compare with Europe where
the dollar buys 50 per cent more, and $8.60 here is only equal
to $5.73 there? Look at their wages, their earning power, and
ask what is the difference in the cost o f production here and
there. Do these census records teach us nothing?
The above figures demonstrate beyond the possibility o f dis
pute that wages are being lowered under the operation of a
monopoly-protecting tariff. It shows more, that a tariff aver
aging nearly 50 per cent is thoroughly unjustifiable on the Re
publican theory of protecting labor, since the gross amount of
labor’s wages only comprises an average of 19.7 per cent of
gross product value (Exhibit 1, pp. — ), much less on the theory
o f providing only the “ difference in the cost of labor,” since
the difference in the cost of labor will not approximate 20 per
cent, nor equal the half of it.
The plain truth is the b ill'w ill not protect labor, but will
gratify the clamorous demand of organized greed and avarice
urged by the lobby o f numerous monopolies. This tariff, in the
pretended interest of the American workman, does not properly
include over 1,000,000 out of 29,000,000 workmen, while it taxes
all.
It has been convincingly shown by Edward Atkinson, in his
learned report of December, 1902 (Exhibit 2 ), that not over
1,000,000 persons out of 29,000,000 persons would be affected in
an adverse way if the tariff were absolutely abolished. This cal
culation, made in great detail, goes far to show the utterly false
pretense of a great public demand for a high protective or
prohibitive tari. Attention is earnestly called to it in Senate
Document No. 46, Sixty-first Congress, first session, from which
I submit the essential part as Exhibit 2.
Average
value,
product of Per cent.
the wageearner.
$2,450
2,204
17.8
20.2
______
Mr. President, here will be seen that the cheapest workmen
(Exhibit 3) in the railroad service, the brakemen, received an
average throughout the United States for 1907, $1.46 a day;
section foremen, $1.90; other shopmen, $2.06; carpenters, $2.40;
machinists, $2.87; firemen and other trainmen, $2.54; con
ductors, $3.69; engineer men, $4.30; station agents, $2.05; gen
eral office clerks, $2.30; other officers, $5.99; general officers,
$11.93. These wages in unprotected industries are decent, are
reasonable, are just according to service, in the transportation
work of the United States. These people have their wages in
fluenced to an important degree by labor organization.
Now, Mr. President, I wish to call the attention of the Senate
to the fact—and a vital fact in this matter—that in the pro
tected industries of the United States the wage-earner does not
receive one-half as much as in the unprotected industries, and
these tables abundantly exhibit it.
Exhibit No. 4 shows that masons and bricklayers get from
45 to 87 cents an hour; structural iron setters, 30 to 62 cents
an hour; ornamental iron setters, 30 to 70 cents an hour; plas
terers, 50 to 87£ cents an h our; lathers, 45 to 62* cents an hour;
hoisting engineers, 50 to 75 cents an hour; tile setters, 35 to 75
cents an hour; plumbers, 50 to 75 cents an hour; steam fitters,
35 to 75 cents an hour; steam fitters’ helpers, 15 to 37* cents
an hour; gas fitters, 35 to 81 cents an hour; carpenters, 35 to
62§ cents an hour; stonecutters, 45 to 70 cents an hour; marble
cutters and marble setters, 30 to 62* cents an hour; painters,
25 to 56 cents an hour; sheet metal wT
orkers, 30 to 62 § cents an
hour; electricians, 25 to 65 cents an hour; roofers, 25 to 75
cents an hour; cement finishers, 35 to 75 cents an hour; laborers
and hod carriers, 15 to 50 cents an hour.
Mr. President, these people are outside of the protected in
dustries; they have some degree o f organization and can de
mand the value from capital for their labor.
The laws of human nature operate upon the laboring man
precisely as they do upon the capitalist, and he tries to get the
greatest return "for his wares. Labor organizations have some
times gone to extremes and put the price of labor above a
reasonable market value and lowered the demand to the point
of putting themselves out of business. The urgency of labors’
need for supplying food and clothing is an extenuating circum
stance even when the demand itself is unreasonable and foolish,
but when the demand of monopoly puts an exorbitant price
upon the necessaries o f life its motive is not hunger for food or
need for clothing or shelter for children, but merely ambition
for power or mere greed for gain.
Now, Mr. President, I wish to call the attention of the Sen
T H E H I G H T A R IF F H A S LOW ERED T H E W AG ES OF AM E R IC A N W O R K M E N IN
ate to the astonishing difference between tne wages of men in
PRO TECTED IN D U S T R IE S MORE T H A N T H E W AG ES OF W O R K M E N IN U N
PRO TECTED IN D U S T R IE S .
unprotected industries with the wages in the “ p r o te c t" indus
I submit as Exhibit 3 a carefully compiled table of the labor tries,” so-called, and you will observe that the wages in the pro
wages of our American railwavs ("Statistics of Railroads in tected industries, except where modified by a powerful organi
United States, 1907, Interstate Commerce Commission, p. 59), zation o f the laborers, as in the glass industry, are far below the
showing the wages of railroad employees in the unprotected in wages in unprotected industries. Organized capital has beaten
dustries of the railroad service, and also a table o f the wages of down the wages of labor to a point at which the proper support
employees in building trades, which are not protected, but which of a family required by a decent American standard is often
are duly organized, prepared by William J. Spencer, secretary of impossible. This meanness on the part of such offending manu
the building-trade department of the American Federation o f facturers is painfully apparent.
Labor, for 1908 (Exhibit 4 ), showing the average wages o f ma T H E PROTECTED IN D U S T R IE S H A V E D RIVEN OUT T H E A M E R IC A N AND SU B
S T IT U T E D T H E FOREIGN ER.
sons and bricklayers, structural iron setters, ornamental iron
setters, plasterers, lathers, hoisting engineers, tile setters, plumb
It has resulted in driving out the native American who was
ers, steam fitters, steam fitters’ helpers, gas fitters, carpenters,
stonecutters, marble cutters and setters, painters, sheet metal able to escape and has substituted in his place the oppressed
workers, electricians, roofers, cement finishers, laborers, and people o f other races, who, having been under the grinding
hod carriers. Their wages per hour will be seen to be, on an monopoly of the landed nobility and powers which have seized
average, at least twice as high as the wages of labor in protected every opportunity in European countries, do not feel so keenly
industries (Exhibit 5 ), as shown by Census Bulletin 77 o f the the crushing conditions imposed upon them in these offending
factories.
Bureau of Labor of 1907.
89032— 8445
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
15
I call attention to this matter because too much has been
said in behalf of protecting the American laborer and keeping
out the pauper labor of Europe. The pauper labor of Europe
to-day fills the very factories of these protected monopolies, and
those same pauper laborers of Europe are coming into this coun
try at the rate of 100,000 a month. It is time that this hypoc
risy should cease.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from New Hampshire?
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
Mr. GALLINGER. Has the Senator the statistics for the
State of Wisconsin?
Mr. OWEN. The statistics will be found in the same tables
to which I have referred.
Mr. GALL NGER. The Senator has them not at hand?
He made an impassioned plea for the mill operatives of New Eng
land, who “ must not be deprived of their right to work and wages,”
Mr. OWEN. Not at hand. I have them available, but not
and for the manufacturers, who must be protected against “ cheap
labor abroad.”
The mill operatives, for whom the Naliaht Senator’s so as to easily read them.
I will say that, o f course, on the eastern coast, with our
eloquence was unloosed, are practically all Greeks, Syrians. Poles,
Armenians, and Italians, who have driven out every other kind of country inviting foreigners into this land we should expect a
labor, because, under present wages in the cotton mill's, to bring up a
large percentage; and I do not speak that in any sense of re
fam ily under American conditions is absolutely impossible.
* *
*
Mr. L o d g e ’ s defense of the cotton, manufacturers, whose mills are proach to those States. I, for one, am not at all in favor of
filled with aliens on starvation wages, is paralleled in history only closing our ports by any tax upon these poor souls who seek
by the arguments made in parliament at the time England was at
tempting to abolish the slave trade, that if the bringing of black a refuge in our land from a monopoly which is worse by far
I invite them, and bid them God
people from Africa to America and elsewhere was prohibited ship than that which we endure.
owners would not find any use for their vessels, and that these slave
speed and welcome. This Republic is under the deepest obliga
ships furnished the only market for decayed fish and other putrid
food, on which there would be a dead loss if the slave trade was tions to those who have come from abroad and to their children.
outlawed.
I honor them, and I am glad, as one American, to give them a
The Pittsburg Survey gives a tabulated map showing that the cordial welcome. I wish they were better paid ; and when they
Carnegie mills at Homestead, from which organized labor w
ras go West and enter the fields of the West, perhaps they will find
driven by private armed military power in the Homestead conditions more congenial to human life and more profitable
riots, is filled with Slovaks, G,477 o f them; with Poles, 611 in and beneficial to them.
Mr. President, I am glad to see America, the land of liberty,
number; with Bohemians and Germans, in another group; with
Croatians, 1,249 in number; with Hungarians, 1,323 in number; made an asylum for the oppressed of other lands, and recognize
with Roumanians, 410 in number; with Poles, 1,644 in number; the fact that the United States is under enormous obligations
with Lithuanians, 476 in number. Austria-Hungary furnished to people who have come from foreign lands, and I only call
attention to these figures to show that the plea of the monopo
10,421; Russia, 2,577; etc.
Representatives on behalf of these monopolies make “ impas lies that they are deeply concerned about high wages for the
sioned appeals ” to protect the American workman against the American workman is so offensively hypocritical and absurd
foreign pauper labor which the monopolies have imported and that no words known to the English language are capable of
are using wholesale with the effect of driving the native Amer describing it.
I have submitted Table 5, showing the wages of workmen in
ican to despair.
Mr. President, examine the census of 1900, volume 1, pages American industries; and I call your attention to the fact that,
except where they are organized, they are on almost starvation
cxxxi and 698, on population and see what it exhibits.
wages. The papers were full a few days ago of the slavery
Table o f foreign born, etc.
of white women brought into these protected factories from
Italy, sold by their kinspeople, and all their wages practically
Percent
taken for their keep and to pay to the foreign home—a substan
age of
White
Total for
tial exhibition of white slavery under the color of freedom and
popula
popula eign born
Foreign
Total
tion for
under the protection of the American flag, which ought not to
tion for
and of
Census 1900, Volume I.
bom
popula eign born
endure slavery either of the white man or the black man.
(cxxxi). eign par foreigntion.
and of
Z call attention to the low wages which are paid in the pro
tected industries, so low as not to be sufficient to sustain an
American family upon the wages of the head of the family,
who may be devoting all his time to that purpose. The average
wage in the cotton and wool industry will not exceed a dollar
a day, and that is shown by our census tables, which I submit.
Now, Mr. President, the protected industries have driven out
the American and substituted the foreigner. We have been
listening for years to talk about the protection of American
labor against the pauper labor o f Europe; and yet our census
shows how shallow and how hollow that pretension is. I call
your attention to what is shown by our census.
The Boston Traveler in the article of June 2, 1909, ridicules
the argument o f the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. L odge ] ,
and says:
entage
(p. 698).
Massachusetts......................
Rhode Island........................
Connecticut..........................
New York.............................
New Jersey..........................
Pennsylvania......................
846,324
131,519
238,210
1,900,425
431,831
985,250
897,386
140,292
282,246
2,415,845
556,294
1,430,028
bom par
entage.
1,743,710
274,811
520,455
4,316,270
988,125
2,415,278
foreignborn par
entage.
2,805,346
428,556
908,420
7,268,894
1,883,669
6,302,115
64.x
52.4
It will be seen by the table which I submit that Massachusetts
has 1.743,710 persons foreign born or of foreign-born parentage
out o f 2,805,346 total population, having therefore 62.1 per cent
of people who are foreign born or of foreign-born parentage;
Rhode Island, in like manner, has 64.1 per cent of its popu
lation foreign born or o f foreign-born parentage; Connecticut
has 57.3 per cent o f foreign born or of foreign-born parent
a l 0 : No-,v York has 59.3 per cent o f its people foreign bom or
o f foreign-bom parentage; New Jersey has 52.4 per cent o f its
population foreign born or o f foreign-born parentage; thus dis
closing in the completest manner the extent to which this use
o f foreign labor has driven out the American.
Mr. KEAN. What is the date o f that?
Mr. OWEN. The last census of 1900, to which I invite the
Senator’s prayerful attention.
Mr. DILLINGHAM. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Vermont?
Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
Mr. DILLINGHAM. I will be glad to have the Senator give,
if he has them, the figures of the percentage of foreign-born as
distinguished from their children.
Mr. OWEN. I have it, Mr. President, in the table which I
submit, giving the exact details.
89032—8445
W AGES
IX
PROTECTED IN D U S T R IE S L O W ER T H A N
IN D U S T R IE S .
IN
UNPROTECTED
I respectfully submit a table (Exhibit 5) showing the wages
of workmen in the protected industries of every class: In the
industry of making carpets; of clothing; cotton goods; foundry
and machine shops; furniture; glass; fur hats; hosiery and
knit goods; iron and steel, bar, and iron and steel, Bessemer;
iron and steel, blast furnace; lumber, paper, and wood pulp;
pottery; printing and binding; shipbuilding; silk goods; woolen
and worsted goods. I have indicated in every case in these
tables the condition of labor organization.
It will be seen by the tables o f Exhibit No. 5, in the grouped
industries, for example, that in 1907 burlers got 14 cents
an hour; dyers, 16 cents an hour; loom fixers (who must be
men of a high class), 28 cents an hour; spoolers, 13 cents an
hour; twisters, 12 cents an hour; weavers, Wilton (high-class
experts), 30 cents an hour; weavers, ingrain, 15 cents an hour;
winders, 13 cents an hour; and, except where the workmen must
be trained experts, their wages are very low.
Buttonhole makers (fem ale), 12 to 14 cents an hour; ex
aminers (female), 11 to 14 cents an hour; finishers, 10 to 13
cents an hour; pressers (m ale), 19 to 26 cents an hour; sew
ing-machine operators, 22 to 31 cents an hour; carding-machine
tenders, 10 to 13 cents an hour; dyers, 11 to 15 cents an h our;
loom fixers, 16 to 24 cents an h our; spinners, 9 to 13 cents an
hour; spinners (fem ale), 7 to 12 cents an hour; weavers
(m ale), 11 to 19 cents an hour; weavers (fem ale), 9 to 16
cents an hour; bleachers, 13 cents an hour; calenderers, 14
cents an hour; color mixers, 14 cents an hour.
In the hat business, colorers get 19 cents an h our; fitters, 12
cents an hour; flower blowers, 17 cents an h our; trimmers, 15
cents an hour; weighers, 13 cents an hour.
Silk goods.—Beamers get 19 cents an hour; doublers, 11 cents
an hour; dyers, 19 cents an hour; loom fixers, 27 cents an hour;
16
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
Prof. John R. Commons, of the University of Wisconsin (vol.
pickers. 12 cents an hour; quillers, 9 cents an hour; spinners,
10 cents an hour; weavers, female, 10 cents an hour; weavers, 2, Publications of the American Sociological Society, p. 141),
says:
female, 17 cents an hour.
The unions have practically disappeared from the trusts, and are dis
Woolen goods.— Burlers get 11 cents an hour; carders, 12
appearing from the large corporation as they grow large
to
cents an hour; card strippers, 13 cents an hour; combers, 12 specialize minutely their labor. The organized workmen areenough in
found
cents an hour; combers, female, 9 cents an hour; dyers, 15 cents the small establishments like the building trades or the fringe of inde
an hour; loom fixers (experts), 26 cents an hour; male spinners, pendents on the skirts of the tr u s ts ; on the railways where skill and
responsibility are not
by division of la b
the
11 cents an hour; male weavers (expert), 21 cents an hour; where strike breakers yet displaceds'hipped i n ; on the o r; in and mines
can not be
docks
other
female weavers (expert), 18 cents an hour.
places where they hold a strategic position.
It must be remembered that these figures, low as they are,
Aaron Jones, esq., master of the National Grange, November
are not uniformly paid; that the laborer who misses an hour 11, 1903, at Rochester, N. Y.. said:
from sickness or weakness, or who is thrown out. of employ
Combinations and trust methods in the sale of supplies and in the
ment by the closing of the shop for repairs or for any other purchase of the products of the farm have in previous addresses been
reason must then rely upon his accumulation in sayings out of set out. A striking and forceful illustration of these methods and their
the producer and the consumer is furnished by the
the wages paid. The matter which I wish to call attention to is effect on both of meats. October 10, 1902, market reports show that
market reports
that under the pretense o f protecting the American workman in in one of the leading live-stock markets of the country the price of
protected industries, the most of whom are foreigners, they are hogs has been lowered during the year 30 per cent and the price of
cent. These manipulations add 40 per cent
paid only about half of the wages that workmen- received in pork raised 10 pertaking 30 per cent from the farmer and 10 perprofit
to the meat trust,
cent
unprotected industries, and with these pretenses o fp a s s io n a t e from the consumer. Beef steers in the hands of farmers were reduced
interest ” in the American workman is an unspeakable fraud 20 per cent and dressed beef raised 10 per cent, thus adding 30 per
profit to
cent from the farmer
which ought not to be endured by men who regard this matter cent cent from the trust and taking 20 per $150,000,000 has been and 10
per
the consumer. More than
lost to
soberly and seriously from a standpoint of patriotism and the the live-stock industry in the past year by the manipulations of the
meat trust. This may in a measure explain how the meat trust may
better interests o f the American Republic.
single city
A great advantage which men have who are organized and contribute $50,000 to place the official management of a wheat, corn,
under obligations to it.
If the entire product of the farm—
not in the “ protected industries,” so called, is that they no hay, cotton, live stock, dairy, and fruit— is taken into account, farmers
longer submit to the long, grinding, sweat-shop hours, but have have lost more than $700,000,000 in the past year through manipula
tions of combines and trusts, and because farmers have not developed
an eight-hour day.
and maintained a wise, safe, and well-guarded business system of sell
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President-----ing the products of the farm. Farmers have also suffered another great
The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma loss in the purchase of supplies needed in this business.
yield to the Senator from New Hampshire?
Monopolies prefer unorganized labor; they prefer that labor
Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
should be helpless and incapable of making effective any demand
Mr. GALLINGER. W ill the Senator kindly inform me in for its comfort or convenience, or for its rights.
what part of the country the wages are paid that he has just
The law should firmly and unhesitatingly demand and re
read?
quire of labor, organized or unorganized, strict obedience to
Mr. OWEN. Table No. 5, which I submit with this matter, the la w ; but it should also demand and require of monopoly
shows the wages paid in different parts of the country.
considerate and decent treatment o f labor and of its rights both
as producer and consumer.
T H E O R G A N IZA TIO N OF A M E R IC A N W O R K M E N .
The tables indicating the wages of working people in highMr. President, I have been gratified to observe the growing
organization of workingmen, which is steadily advancing in the tariff industries are taken from Bulletin No. 77 of the United
United States. Only by such organization and by the solidarity States Bureau of Labor for 1907.
I call upon the chairman of the Committee on Finance to ex
of their interests can labor make effective its righteous hope for
a decent market for its w ares; only in this way can men, under plain the astonishing parallel between the low rate of wages
present conditions o f organized capital, obtain a fair return paid to people in protected industries and the high wages paid
those in industries not protected.
for their labor.
What satisfactory explanation can the Senator from Rhode
It is true that sometimes the unwise members in certain labor
organizations compel their leaders to stand for wages “ higher Island offer for the difference in the pay of masons and brick
than the traffic will bear,” and in this case they throw them layers, who receive 60 cents an hour in Boston, and the burler
selves out of employment and are thus compelled to be more in the carpet factory receiving 14 cents; the dyer, 16 cents; the
moderate in their demands. It is true that sometimes thought loom fixer, 28 cents; the spooler, 13 cents; the twister, 12 cents;
less men force their leaders into gross error and compel them the weaver of Brussels and Wilton, 30 cents; the weavers of in
to make demands that are unreasonable, but all men make grain, 16 cents; and the winders, 13 cents an hour?
How does the Senator from Rhode Island explain why the
errors, and all men are unreasonable at times, and these things
plasterer receives 60 cents an hour in Boston and the workers
are self-correcting.
Examine these tables which I submit, and you will observe in cotton goods can not possibly receive half as much, and do
that just in degree as they are organized just in that degree not average one-third as much?
In good old Boston the plasterer gets 60 cents an hour; the
do they receive proper compensation and obtain decent hours.
They deserve the greatest credit for what they have done in tile setter gets 60 cents an h our; the plumber, 55 cents an h our;
obtaining the eight-hour rule among the organized trades and the steam fitter, 53 cents; the stonecutter, 50 cents; the carpen
in promoting legislation to protect labor and to promote its ter, 40 cents; the marble cutter, 56 cents; and side by side
interest. If Congress had heretofore seen more clearly its with these unprotected industries the carding-machine tender
duty, their organization would have been in large measure un in the cotton goods protected industry receives 13 cents; the
dyers, 15 cents; the loom fixers, 24 cents; the spiuners, 13 and
necessary.
Shall the organization of labor be condemned because of the 14 cents; the mule spinners, 24 cents; the weavers, 20 cents;
thoughtless or even criminal act of some occasional individuals the female weavers, 17 cents; the bleachers, 14 cents; the
out of this vast army? It would be as reasonable to condemn color mixers, 14 cents; the male dyers, 15 cents; the male en
the church because of the sins of its occasional members. The gravers, 45 cents; the male printers, 44 cents; and this remark
organization of labor stands in the main for good order, for able comparison is most striking all the way through these
respect to law, for patriotism, for the upbuilding of our coun tables, except in cases where labor itself, by its own organiza
employer.^
try, for the presetvtttkrii o f Loiu&h life aud a deet.it reward to tion, has prevented itself from being plundered oj
PR O TE C T IO N A S IT IS P R ACT ICED IS AN O PE N , O BVIO U S FRAUD.
those who perform the hardest labors of life and bear the sweat
It is time that the New England Senators were dropping the
and dust, exposure and danger, of life’s hard places.
These great organizations are a bulwark to society and stand mask of superior knowledge and of mysterious learning with
for the future stability and preservation of our institutions, regard to the protective tariff.
The worst enemy of protection, as it is practiced, is detection.
while their chief antagonists, the captains o f monopoly, who, I
The infinite pains taken by the committee in charge of this bill
trust, will soon be led by public opinion to better n ethods, have
been often misled by avarice and greed, have been thus blinded to furnish Members o f this body with all sorts of data except
to their duty toward the working people, and are blindly pur the vital facts with regard to “ the difference in cost of produc
suing a policy whose results constitute a menace to the stability tion at home and abroad,” does not argue well for their judg
ment or for their sincerity in dealing with this question.
o f our present peaceful progress.
I am more than willing to believe that they have merely fol
I think the less of the management o f the United States
Steel, and of the American Tobacco Company, and of the sugar lowed a beaten track and trodden the pathway of greatest con
trust, and the Cramp shipbuilding yards, and others, that they venience, of easy good nature, but I can not but feel that a
have so opposed organized labor that no member of organized generous complaisance to those who have contributed to their
successful campaigns is also responsible for the lack of this
labor can be employed by these monopolies.
89032—8445
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
IT
essential information. I wish to make record here that the In
Mr. OWEN. I have heard of dispatches from London which
formation which I have obtained with regard to this matter is were not reliable.
due to no effort of theirs. I have been compelled as a Member
The matter submitted by Mr. G a l l in g e b is as follow s:
of this body to dig out laboriously the information which I lay
WOMEN’ ON’ STARVA TIO N P A T ---- R E V ELATIO N S OP T H E “ SW E A T IN G ” SY ST E M
before the Senate.
IN LONDON
P A C T S BROU GH T OUT BY A POOR S E A M S T R E S S ’ S A T T E M P T
How does the Senator from Rhode Island explain the fact
AT SU IC ID E
H O M E W O R K E R S, 62 CEN T S TO $1.10 A W E E K
AVERAGE
W E E K L Y PAY OF E N G L IS H W O M EN $ 1 . 7 5 .
that in the unprotected industries o f New England, of trans
portation for example, the station agents get an average daily
[From New York Sun, June 13, 1909.]
i
pay of $2.03, while a carding machine tender in the protected
L ondon , June 2.
cotton-goods industry receives 13 cents an hour, and the dyers 15
A poor little
London
cents an hour, and the spinners 13 cents an hour, and the weav jumped into the seamstress attempted suicide infished out,recently. She
Thames and was ignominiously
not drowned,
ers 19 cents an hour.
and not in the least repentant. When questioned as to reasons for her
How does he explain that enginemen in the unprotected in act she had only one to give. She simply could not keep body and soul
dustry on the railway service receive $3.78 a day and conduc together by working her hardest at her trade, and in utter fatigue she
end her struggles.
.
tors $3.26 a day, and in the protected industry o f printing tex had decided tonothing very new in her story, .but .when she explained
There was
tiles the bleachers receive IS cents an hour, the calenderers 14 that she always had plenty of work to do, the only difficulty being to
cents an hour, the color mixers 14 cents an hour, and dyers 15 live on the prices paid for her labors, London was roused from its
apathy long enough to protest against the “ sweating
of women thus
cents an hour?
revealed.
„
....
The House of Lords once defined “ sweating
as a condition under
How does the Senator from Rhode Island explain why it is
which work is carried on in insanitary surroundings and fob low wages.
that in the unprotected industry of railways in New England There are those who would add that it is a condition of labor which
firemen receive $2.20 a day, trainmen $2.32 a day, carpenters does not give the laborer, in return for a fair day s work, enough to
$2.25 a day, section foremen $2.24 a day, laborers $1.85 a day, maintain himself and his fam ily in decency and comfort.
In
are the greatest sufferers from
when in the protected industry o f hosiery and knit goods the Their England it is women who all the year round and allowing sweating.
average wage, taking it
for sick
knitters receive only 20 cents an hour for men and 13 cents an ness and slackness, is not much more than $1.75 a week, lh e Lanca
hour for women, loopers 14 cents an hour, the menders 13 cents shire textile trade average is $3.75, and in some districts as much as
$ 6 ; but this
pulled d w
by
East
an hour, the men pressers 17 cents, and the women pressers home worker, comparatively high rate is 62 cents oto n$1.10the week. End
who earns anything from
a
10 cents an hour?
In the unskilled women’s trades there is no standard by which wages
And how do these higher wages in unprotected industries con are computed. For instance, one famous firm of cocoa manufacturers
trast with the blast-furnace men and cinder snappers receiving pays women for filling bags with cocoa 28 cents a thousand bags, and
for
firm, in
15 cents an hour, the hot-blast men 19 cents an hour, the keep exactly the same awork is done girls 16 cents for aanotherby packing East
London there is
firm whose
earn $3.50
week
tea.
In the same locality there is another firm, the head of which is a wellers’ helpers 17 cents an hour, and the top fillers 17 cents an
known sportsman and yachtsman, where the earnings of the girls
hour?
only $1.87
week.
.
,
, . . rn
The plain truth is that in the unprotected industries of trans averagemanager of a atin-plate factory recently ■fixed time rates at $Eoo
The
portation, as shown by the compilation of wages by the Inter a week for his women workers, and he openly gave the reason that
state Commerce Commission and the labor in the unprotected they had taken advantage of piecework rates to make too much, borne
. .
.
,
.„
industries of the building trades, compiled by the American had earned $ 4 ! wage paid to waitresses in tea shops or restaurants
The average
Federation o f Labor, by William J. Spencer, secretary, is far throughout the country does not exceed $2.50 a week. On this the
must keep up a neat and well-dressed appearance. Then wages
better paid than in the protected industries o f the cotton mills, girlslikely to be interfered with and even, if “ necessary,” reduced.
are
the hosiery mills, the woolen mills, and iron mills, and other
Many firms don't pretend to pay their girls a living wage. The head
factories.
of a large company was asked recently how he expected the girls in
employment to live
The tables submitted o f the wages o f the building trades, his“ I don’ t expect it,” heon $1.50 a week.
answered.
Immediately we hear that a girl
which are unprotected, show that they receive a wage over 200 has lost her father or that she has no outside means of support, she
per cent higher than the wages in the protected industries, and
S This^sanaf firm employs
“
waitresses.”
the reason for this is not difficult to see. Labor in the build 'work from 11.30 a. m. tillwhat itp. calls forhalf-day week. All tipsThey
6.30
m.
$1 a
are
ing trades and in the railroad business is comparatively easy JLUI 1 C 1 1 C U .
of organization, because the men in the railroad and building
The lot of the home worker is the worst of all.
Miss Mary Mactrades are out o f doors and can be reached and talked to and Arthur secretarv of the Women’s Trade Union League, gave a picture
interview.
organized. They are not locked up inside of the jail-like in of “the home worker in the East End in an that they take the trouble
So terrible is their life that I wonder
closures of private factories, where it is almost impossible to to exist at all,” she said. “ Here is a single room in a Stepney slum.
The furniture consists of a table, a chair, and a bed. The unfinished
reach the employees or to organize them.
trousers at which the woman stitches serves as a blanket at night.
Labor has rarely succeeded in thoroughly organizing itself in
“ She slaves from daybreak until her eyes fail, and she never earns
any of the great manufacturing industries, which are usually more than 5 shillings a‘ week. She sustains herself mainly, almost en
tirely upon weak tea.
Some days she drinks 14 cups, making the same
controlled by monopolies and mechanical corporate power.
tea leaves do service again
That is one of the
Organized labor was practically driven out of the shops of of England, and there are and again. in similar plight. women slaves
thousands
Andrew Carnegie and of the United States Steel Corporation,
“ I know many women who make men’s shirts at 1 shilling or 9 pence
American Tobacco Company, Cramps’ shipyards, and various a dozen. I have even found the actual worker making at 8 pence a
dozen shirts which had originally been given out at 1 shilling a dozen.
others of the existing monopolies.
“ There is a girl in W oolw ich; she lias one child, aged 2 years, en
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President-----tirely dependent upon her. She is a shirt finisher and does buttoning
The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma and buttonholing by hand. She is paid 5 shillings a dozen for collars.
Remember, this is high-class work. Cotton costs her from 3 pence to
yield to the Senator from New Hampshire?
4 pence a week. Her average earnings are 4 shillings 6 pence a week,
Mr. OWEN. Certainly.
or from one-half pence to three-fourths pence an hour.
Mr. GALLINGER. The Senator has put in tables—I have
“ Every day she has to spend an hour and a half in fetching her
not seen them—showing the -wages in protected and unprotected work, as it is only given out in small quantities. Sometimes she has
worked with hardly any break for twenty hours, from 6 a. m. until
industries. In the New York Sun of the 13th instant there is a 2 a. m. the following morning. The rent of the room is 1 shilling and
dispatch from London giving the wages paid in unprotected 6 pence a week.
“ All this she told the parliamentary committee. The members of
industries in Great Britain. Is the Senator willing that I should
Parliament were aghast. Some were incredulous. ‘ But how do you
have this inserted in the R ec o r d ?
live, you and the c h ild ? ’ asked one member of Parliament.
‘ W e don’t
Mr. OWEN. I am perfectly willing that it should be inserted live’, ’ the woman replied, with a passion in her tone I had never heard
before. * Often we have no food at a ll.’ ”
in my remarks.
Miss MacArthur contends that goods are not sold any cheaper when
Mr. GALLINGER. Thank you.
made by sweated labor. She tells of a fur-lined motor coat, marked at
The VICE-PRESIDENT. Without objection, it will be in SIOS, which was made for $1.88 by sweated labor; and of a $5.25 night
dress’ for which the home worker who made it got 5 cents— 63 cents for
serted.
employer
made
Mr. OWEN. I will state to the Senator from New Hampshire a dozen of these nightdresses. The pay more, of the girls who profit
these nightdresses said he could not
as there was no
that in my examination of this matter I have tried not to make in his trade.
a partial statement giving the facts favorable to my view and
There are many persons who are struggling to organize and help the
those unfavorable to the other side, but have tried to give, in a women workers of England. There is a scheme for a trades board
fix
legal minimum
and there are other propositions
just measure, both sides, because the only purpose which I have which shall help a to do away withwage, present sweating system, if they
which will
the
in view is to arrive at the truth and to make it manifest. I do are ever put into practice.
not know what the quotation from the Sun is nor its sources
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, the Senator from New Hampshire
nor its accuracy.
Mr. GALLINGER. It is a dispatch bearing a London date, I might have struck out the London heading and inserted New
York, Pittsburg, or Jersey City, and the cruel oppression of
will say to the Senator.
8 9 0 3 2 — 8 4 4 5 ---------3
18
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
labor by organized capital, uncontrolled by law, would not be
overdrawn, as I shall abundantly show before I conclude.
The Senator and the party o f which he is a conspicuous
leader have a duty to perform in which, they seem strangely
oblivious.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Utah?
Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
Mr. SMOOT. The Senator has made a comparison about a
man, a bricklayer-----Mr. GALLINGER. Or a plumber.
Mr. SMOOT. In an unprotected industry, receiving 60 cents
an hour, while a little girl who does spooling in a woolen mill
gets 14 cents. Is that a fair comparison?
Mr. OWEN. I should say it is not a fair comparison. That
comparison has not been made.
Mr. SMOOT. The Senator just made a comparison that was
even worse than that, because he spoke o f burlers in a woolen
null, and they were receiving only 11 cents.
Mr. OWEN. I gave, in extenso, the wages paid to burlers
and to all other employees in woolen mills and in silk mills and
in cotton mills, stating what it was, whether they were male or
whether they were female. I have given them all, and the com
parison is just which I have made, substantially, and no com
parison the Senator might suggest of a little girl and a big,
burly brick mason, who weighs 247 pounds, will affect the gen
eral comparison in the slightest degree.
Mr. SMOOT. That is exactly the comparison which the Sen
ator makes. And in relation to the wages paid here for weavers,
I may say I do not know a weaver in any part o f this country
who earns so small an amount as that stated by the Senator.
I have many times seen weavers earn as high as $3 a day, and
the higher the wage they earn the better it is for the manufac
turer, because they are all on piecework.
Mr. OWEN. Does the Senator challenge the accuracy o f the
census in this matter?
Mr. SMOOT. I challenge the figures the Senator gave here
as to the wages paid to woolen weavers in this country.
Mr. OWEN. Then I commend the Senator to the United
States census, from which the table was taken, and he may dis
pute the authoritative tables o f the Federal Government; but he
can not correct the accuracy of my quotation from the census
reports.
Mr. SMOOT. I am not saying that the figure quoted by the
Senator was not quoted from some table, but I do positively say
that weavers in this country are not paid the price the Senator
quoted.
Mr. OWEN. I appeal from the evidence of the Senator from
Utah, as a special pleader, to the evidence o f the federal census
and of the London Board of Trade, and prefer to take the
census of the United States and the official figures to his off
hand comments.
Mr. DOLLIVER. Mr. President------Mr. OWEN. I cordially yield to the Senator from Iowa.
Mr. DOLLIYER. I have been very much interested in the
Senator’s statistics and figures, but it has often occurred to me
that the industries to which he refers as unprotected industries
are really the only perfectly protected industries we have in the
Inited States, for the reason that if a man is to build a brick
house here at all he has no competition from any quarter on
earthy A man making a horseshoe has to be protected by a
law, but a man shoeing a horse has an absolute, perfectly
natural protection, because the horse has to be shod where he is
and not in some other country, and no competition, direct or in
direct. beats upon those occupations which are naturally and
perfectly protected.
Mr. GIVEN. I think there is force in the ohser ’atiou o f the
Senator from Iowa, and I shall not quarrel with it, but content
myself with saying that like industries abroad are also much
better i>aid than factory labor. But I do call attention to the
fact that these men who are in the railway service and in the
unprotected building trades and not in the business of manu
facturing woolen or cotton or flax textiles are receiving a very
much higher reward than those who are in those industries
and I have shown by these tables that they cou.d be paid a
much larger price without depriving the factories of a just re
ward. If there were some competition, it would be far better
for labor; and if there were some measure o f competition in this
country, I believe it would be better for the manufacturers
themselves.
89032— 8445
labor
h as
IN
not
THE
been
able
VALU ES
to
THAT
sh are
e q u it a b l y
LABOR H A S
w it h
IN C R E A SIN G L Y
th e
em ployers
CREATED.
In volume 8, page 982, o f the Twelfth Census, 1900, is the
following table. It shows that labor received in 1850, 23.21 per
cent of the total value of products, while in 1900 it received
only 17.8 per cent o f the product, although the per capita in
crease in production was greater by 130 per cent in 1900 than
in 1850.
Average num Total annual Total annual Average per
capita pro
ber of wagevalue of
wages.
duction.
earners.
products.
Year.
1850........................
1900.............
Average an
nual wage.
Year.
1850
1900.
957,059
5,321,389
Per capita in Per capita in
Per cent of crease
crease in
product paid ductionininpro
the wages in
in wages.
50 years.
50 years.
23.21
17.80
$247
437
.
$1,064
2,451
$236,755,464 $1,019,106,616
2,330,578,010 13,039,279,566
P er cen t.
P er cen t.
77
130
From Exhibit 1 labor shows a diminishing wage as com
pared to value o f its product.
In textiles labor received 22 per cent of the product in 1890,
20.8 per cent in 1900, 19.5 per cent in 1905.
In the iron and steel industries labor received 24.9 per cent
of the product in 1900, 22.1 per cent in 1905.
In the leather industries labor received 20.1 per cent o f the
product in 1890, 16.9 per cent in 1900, 16.5 per cent in 1905.
In paper and printing industries labor received 26.5 per cent
; in 1890, 23.1 per cent in 1900, 21.6 per cent in 1905.
In metal and metal products labor received 20.4 per cent of
the gross product in 1890, 12.9 per cent in 1900, 12.7 per cent
in 1905.
In tobacco industries labor received 21 per cent in 1890, 18.9
per cent in 1905.
Labor has constantly grown in efficiency, but has not been
able to share equitably in the value it has created.
Taking a special industry, such as iron aud steel, including
rolling mills and blast furnaces, as shown by the special report
o f the United States Census Office, Part IV, selected Industries,
1905, on pages 5 and 16, will be found the tables for the years
1890 and 1905. I submit an analysis which shows that the per
capita increase of the product o f labor by weight was 50 per
cent; by value, 33.5 per cent; while the increase in wages is
only 11 per cent.
Year.
Averago
Total
number of Total
Total value
wage-earn- wagesapai(ju of products. weight of
products
ers em6 v
in tons.
ployed.
171,181
242,740
Year.
$S9,273,956 $478,687,519
141,439,900 905.S54.152
Per capita
increase in
;production
1in 15 years
in values.
Per cent.
! 1890.
1905.
3 3 .5
Per capita
increase in
production
by weight.
16,264,478
34,844,933
—
Per capita
increase in Average
wages in 15 weekly
Mage.
years.
p . - r ___
5 0 .5
1 1 .5
$10.02
1 1.20
These figures might be multiplied indefinitely in all of the
monopoly-controlled industries.
I submit a table of the wages in the woolen and cotton goods
factories of New England. It shows that they do not receive to
day an average wage o f exceeding a dollar a day, a fact of
special interest in connection with this controversy where the
schedules are supposed to be written for the protection of
labor.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
Wages
and
1860
Year.
woolen and cotton goods factories of
New England.
1900 compared in
Humber
of em
ployees .
Wages.
Wages
per
capita.
Actual
in
Value
Pounds
Value of of out of cotton crease
in out
product. put per
used.
capita.
put by
weight.
Cotton:
I 8 6 0 ............
1 9 9 0 ..........
P er ct.
8 1 ,4 0 3 $ 1 6 ,7 2 0 ,9 2 0
1 0 4 ,9 4 4 5 6 ,2 5 8 ,2 0 2
1 8 6 0 ...
1 9 0 0 . ..
2 5 ,5 8 3
8 2 ,4 7 2
6 ,1 4 4 ,8 4 7
3 1 ,2 3 0 ,7 7 2
$205 $ 7 9 ,3 5 9 ,0 0 0
341 1 9 1 ,6 9 0 ,9 1 3
240 4 7 ,7 2 2 ,8 1 4
3 7 8 1 6 1 ,5 6 6 ,2 7 7
$79 4 2 8 3 ,7 0 1 ,3 0 6
1 ,1 6 2 9 4 0 ,9 0 8 ,1 1 4
331
1 ,4 7 4
1 ,9 3 1
This schedule shows that, counting the best paid labor, the
annual average wage of the employees in the cotton and woolen
mills do not exceed $1 a day, and that, therefore, the pretense
of better paid labor in the United States in the cotton and
woolen mills, at least, is not true, because such wages do not
greatly exceed the wages in Europe; and measured by purchas
ing power, probably do not exceed them at all; and measured
by the output o f American labor, which is twice as efficient as
European labor, the American labor is not as well paid as Euro
pean labor. The American manufacturer gets all the net profit.
It has been shown in this debate what the enormous profits of
the cotton and woolen mills have been, and our statistics clearly
demonstrate the inequitable manner in which these profits have
been proportioned between the American monopolists and his
foreign-born workmen.
A M E R IC A N AND EU RO PEAN W AG ES IN PR O TE C T E D IN D U S T R IE S COM PARED.
I submit thus comparison of wages in the United States, Ger
many, France, and the United Kingdom, with the proper au
thorities, showing that the wages paid in the United States in
the textile industry do not very greatly exceed those paid
in Germany, France, and England, while it is conceded that
19
the output of the American laborer is twice as much as in
Europe.
The spinners, for example, in Germany in 1905, at Mulhausen,
received from $6.57 to $7.30 per week. In France they received
$5.91 and in the United States $4.12. The weavers, on the con
trary, received in Germany $4.02 to $4.75; in France, $4.48 to
$5.19; in the Untied Kingdom, $5.11 to $7.08; and in the United
States, $8.29. So that the weavers in our country received
double as much as they did in Germany, and the spinners in
our country received a smaller money wage than in either
Germany or France.
Mr. SMOOT. Does the table show that the weavers receive
less than the spinners in Germany?
Mr. OWEN. Yes, sir.
Mr. SMOOT. Whoever prepared the table does not know a
thing about manufacturing, and it can not possibly be true.
Mr. OWEN. The Senator from Utah having corrected the
United States census with regard to employees in cotton facto
ries, may now correct the tables used by the Board of Trade of
the United Kingdom in their report to Parliament, from which
this is taken.
Mr. SMOOT. I know just as well as I know I am alive that
there is no country that can employ weavers at a less price
than they can spinners. Spinners are boys and girls. Weavers
are men and women. It can not be possible. It is a mistake.
Mr. OWEN. I again appeal from the personal assurances of
the Senator from Utah [Mr. S m o o t ] to the records of the Board
of Trade of London and of the United States census, from which
these figures are accurately taken; and I call attention to the
fact that the Senator from Rhode Island, the chairman of the
Committee on Finance, when he was giving these tables, con
fined himself to those parts o f the tables favorable to his conten
tion and failed to insert those parts of the tables which were un
favorable to his contention, and such a leadership I neither
approve nor follow.
These tables show the differences which I have pointed out,
and they speak for themselves and are easily capable of their
verification.
W a g e s in t e x t i l e i n d u s t r y in G e r m a n y , F r a n c e , U n i t e d K i n g d o m , a n d
Germany, 1905, Mul
hausen.
U n ited S ta te s.
France, 1905, Lille.
In the protected industries.
Weekly
pay.
Hours
work.
Weekly
pay.
United
United
Kingdom.
Weekly pay, States.
1906 (W . K. Average,
Hours
Preston).
work.
1904.
Hours.
COTTON IN D U S T R Y .
Spinners:
Male..........
Female___
Weavers:
Male..........
__Female_____
Piecers.............
Laborers.........
Dyers...............
Mule spinners.
$6.57-47.30
66
$5.91
60
02- 4.75
4. 42- 4.87
3.81
3.65- 4.'62
66
4.48- 5.19
60
66
3 .5 1 - 5 .1 9
4 .1 0
4 . 6 6 - 5 .2 5
1 1 .7 8 - 1 2 .4 5
60
60
6 0 -6 6
60
4.
66
58J-63
$ 4 .1 2
5 .1 6
6 4 .5 5
6 1 .0 1
8.29
7 .5 8
60. 42
60.13
8 .5 2 - 1 0 .9 5
6 .8 9
1 1 .2 4
62.48
59.32
Bradford.
1.95- 2.68
6 .5 2
5 8 .3 4
9 .8 7
8 .7 9
5 8 .4 7
5 7 .5 7
7 .1 1
5 .4 9
7 .8 6
5 8 .3 3
5 7 .4 0
5 9 .1 1
9.74
8.19
57.82
10.93
9.84
10.98
52. 98
50. 71
5 5 .0 5
$5. ll-$ 7 .06
WOOLEN INDUSTRY.
Mulhausen.
7.20- 7.79
5.11- 5.84
4.38
4.38
5.60
Spinners...................
W eavers ( Asehen):
Male...................
F'einale___
Comlers (Leipzig):
Male..............
Female___
Dyers (Leipzig)___
W eavers:
S ilk -
Male..........
Female.......
Velvet...............
I
I
Hi bbon—
Male__
Female.
Dyers.................
61
60
60
65
65
lioubaix.
6.22- 6.81
5.45- 5. 84
3.16- 4.14
4.20- 4.26
3. 79- 3.91
4 . 8 7 - 5 .6 0
2 . 6 8 - 3 .4 1
5 .8 4
SILK INDUSTRY.
Crefeld, 1905.
5.11-5.84 j
5.84- 6 57 i
7.30
6.57 |
58-58}
58-581
58-5SJ
60
Lyon, 1905.
3.20-' 3.51
4.10- 4.97
a 3.51- 4.66
5.84-6.81
60
60
60
60
5 6 .5 2
a St. Etienne.
N on. —
In 1905 the wages received at St. Etienne, France, by ribbon weavers varied from $3.51 to $4.66 per week. In 1906 it was over
10 0 per cent more than this.
In August, 1907, it was from 30 per cent to 50 per cent higher than in 1905. These weavers received as pay,
tn piecework, from one-half to two-thirds the value of their product.
U i t h o r i t y f o r United States figures: Bulletin of the Bureau o f Labor, No. 59, July, 1905.
\uthority for foreign figures: Cost of Living in German Towns ( 1 9 0 8 ) ; Cost of Living in French Towns (1909); Cost of Living o f
W orking Classes, United Kingdom, 1 9 0 8 ; Report of Board of Trade to Parliament.
I exhibit a comparison o f wages in the United States, Germany, I which present a very much more favorable wage to the unproFrance, and the United Kingdom in the nonprotected industries, | tected American workingman and much more favorable hours.
8 9 0 3 2 — 8445
20
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
Comparison of wages in United States, Germany, France, and United Kingdom.
Berlin (1905).
Class of labor.
(In the unprotected industries.
Weekly
wages.
Number
of hours.
$9.51
9.51
7.77
7.81
7.16
6.25
8.86
8.27-9.41
9.02-9.41
7.30-7.58
8.77-9.01
7.79
8.73
5.11-5.84
Bricklayers and masons...........
Carpenters...................................
Joiners and cabinetmakers___
Plumbers.....................................
Painters.......................................
Laborers (building trades).......
Hod carriers (building trades)
Molders.........................................
Turners........................................
Smiths..........................................
Pattern makers......................... .
Brewers.......................................
Compositors (printing).............
Street sweepers...........................
London (Oct., 1905).
53} 1
53} \
52
53}
53}
53}
53}
58}-G0
58}-60
58}-60
58}-60
57
54
63
Weekly
wages.
Number
of hours.
$10.65
11.16
8.77
7.10
7.10
9.49
9.49
9.49
10.56
7.30
9.49
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
54
50
United States—North
Atlantic (1904).
Paris (Oct., 1905).
Weekly
wages.
f
f
f
i
/
\
/
i
/
\
/
\
Weekly
wages.
Number
of hours.
$9.35
10.50
9.35
9.35
9.35
5.84
5.84
a 11.97
6 8.17
0 11.23
68.17
0 12.73
69
.05
o 12.60
6 8.88
6.43
<11.09
d 12.86
6.59
60
60
60
54
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
48
42
60
l
}
i
i
|
Number
of hours.
$25.52
18.03
20.60
16.95
9.50
13.88
17.17
15.34
16.73
17.87
17.54
18.24
9.50
46.92
47.89
48.00
48.40
54.70
46.72
56.38
56.07
57.03
56.25
58.20
52.16
58.28
a Piecework.
6 Time work.
e Day.
d Night.
Iteport of board of tra d e : Cost of living in German towns, 1 9 0 8 ; cost of living in French towns, 1 9 0 9 ; cost of living of working classes,
United Kingdom, 1908.
compare the dates as nearly as they could be compared, and
have not attempted to compare the tables of Great Britain,
made by the board of trade there, with the tables made at a
very different period. I have compared them as nearly as they
were available of adjacent years. But, I will say to the Sen
ator from New Hampshire, that the question of “ the difference
in the cost of production at home and abroad ” is easily dis
covered, and he illustrates that he knows how to do it.
I now take a table—Exhibit No. 6, the wages and cost of
living in the United Kingdom, Germany, and France, showing
the average family income, the cost of living, the articles of
food, and so forth. I ask that it may be printed in my remarks
without reading.
As Exhibit No. 6, I submit the wages and cost of living in the
United Kingdom, Germany, and France.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from New Hampshire?
Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
Mr. GALLINGER. I will ask the Senator if he has con
sulted Bulletin No. 80, published in January, 1909? It is four
years later than the one he quoted from. If the Senator will
turn to page 63, he will find that in Dundee male shifters are
working for $2.29 a week in the textile mills, and male pre
parers are working for $2.51 a week. It seems to be an ex
traordinarily low wage. There is nothing like it in this
country, I take it, and yet that is in the unprotected textile
mills of Great Britain and from a recent publication by our
Commissioner of Labor.
Mr. OWEN. I have these tables of 1904 and 1905, which
B IT 6 .
W ages
and
cost
of
liv in g in
Under $6.08.
Limit weekly income.
U n ite d
K in g d o m ,
$6.08 and under $7.40.
G erm a n y, and F ran ce.
$7.40 and under $8.52.
$8.52 and under $9.73.
$9.73 and over.
United
United ror
United Ger
United
United
Ger
Ger
Ger
G"
King many. France. King many. France. King many. France. King many. France. King- m r; France.
dom.
dom.
dom. man> •
dom.
dom.
Number of returns...
Average family weekly income
Average number of children
261
$5.20
3.1
1,065
$5.30
2.3
614
$5.58
1.77
289
$6.56
a3
1,329
$6.59
2.5
931
$6.73
1.80
416
$7. 77
32
1,223
$7.75
2.5
1,065
$7.87
1.92
382
$8.89
34
692
$3 92
2.8
821
$9.08
2.13
596
$12.65
44
737
$11.85
38
1,951
$12.88
Z 91
$0.74
28.44
$0.64
2 i 04
$0.73
24 10
$0.81
29.97
$0.70
25.05
$0.76
24 58
$0.80
29. 44
$0.74
23 06
$0.82
23 19
$3 82
29.99
$0.83
29.83
$0.89
27.62
$1.05
37.76
$1.09
33 21
$1.15
33 89
$0.79
6.42
$0.15
$0.99
5.83
$0.06
$0.92
$1. 01
7.57
$0.18
$1.18
6.60
$0.06
$1.12
& 49
$1.25
$1. 41
7.82
$0.06
$1.38
7.81
$1.32
9.25
$0.24
$1. 57
3 77
$0.07
$1.55
3 57
$1. 75
11.87
$0.32
$3 10
11.35
$0.09
$311
11.55
$0.20
$0.12
6.2
$0. 11
6.9
$0.13
6.9
$0.17
8.7
$0.15
9.2
$0.15
3 1
$0.22
11.3
$0. 17
10.2
$0.18
9.3
$0. 24
12.0
$0.19
11.06
$0.19
13 2
$0. 34
13 3
$0. 24
14 4
$3 26
13 4
$0.16
5. 54
$0.25
10.57
$0.15
5.81
$0.23
7.72
$0.31
12.30
$0.18
6 .8 8
$0.31
9.85
$0.34
12.83
$0.20
7.6
$0.33
10.34
$0.40
14 45
$0.22
31
$0.41
12 63
$0.44
13 10
$0.27
9.73
$0.10
0.67
$0.06
0.40
$0.08
0.46
$0.11
a 70
$0.08
a 46
$0.10
0.55
$0.12
0. 79
$0.09
0.62
$0.12
0.68
$0.12
3 77
$0. 10
0.00
$0. 14
0.75
$0.16
1. 32
$0.13
0. 77
$0.19
1.00
$0.41
2.05
$0.49
2.56
$0.42
2.25
$0.51
2.47
$0.60
2.79
$0.47
2.41
$0.58
2.67
$0.35
307
$0.50
2.59
$0.62
2.87
$3 72
345
$3 55
2.80
$0. 90
3 96
$0. 90
4 23
$3 72
$0.18
14.05
$0.10
$0.09
$0.20
26.04
$0.11
$0.07
$0.15
12. 30
$0.24
$0. P
8
$0.20
15.84
$0. 14
$0.10
$0.21
23 96
$0. 16
$0.09
$0. 16
13 93
$0.28
$0. 10
$0.21
13 11
$0.20
$0.12
$0. 21
23 81
$0. 19
$0.09
$0.16
1464
$0.33
$0. 10
$3 20
15.87
$0. 23
$0. 11
$3 23
24 63
$0.21
$0. 10
$0. 18
13 85
$3 35
$0.11
$0. 28
13 93
$0. 32
$3 14
$0. 29
33 55
$0. 27
$0.12
$0.24
23 50
$0. 48
$0.13
$0.23
$0.15
$0.15
0.44
$0.29
$0.19
$0. 16
0. 46
$0.33
$0.21
$0.20
0.55
$0.35
$0.24
$3 21
0.55
$0. 46
$3 30
|Lft
0
$0.16
3. 87
$0.26
$0.03
$0.09
1.83
$0.13
$0.09
$0.11
1. 48
$0.01
$0. 72
$0.20
4 62
$0.33
$0.05
$a 10
1.96
$0.17
$0.13
$0.11
1.50
$0.01
$0.32
$0.22
497
$0.41
$0.08
$0.10
1.98
$3 17
$0.16
$3 12
1.72
$3 02
$3 42
$0.23
3 21
$0.46
$3 14
$0. 11
2.14
$0.20
$318
$0.13
1.83
$3 03
$3 53
$0. 30
3 70
$a 62
$a 18
$3 13
2.67
$0. 24
$3 31
$0.16
Z 22
$3 04
$3 75
$a 44 $ a .i 8 $4 34 $4 10 $3 94 $5.05 $4 58 $4 56 $5.43 $3 14
■
117a 88 $175.76 1225.68 $213 20 S204. 88 1262. 60 $23a 16 $ ’.97. 12 I5SKL .36 $267.28
$3 09
$7. 22
$6. 66
$373 44 $343 32
$3 81
COST OF LIVING.
Bread and flour:
Cost......................................
Amount............................
.pounds..
Meat:
Cost...........................................
Amount................................. .pounds..
Fish, cost........................................
Eggs:
Cost............................................
Amount.................................... number..
Milk:
Cost............................................
Amount....................................
Cheese:
Cost............................................
Amount..................................... .pounds..
Butter, lard, etc.:
Cost............................................
Amount..................................... .pounds..
Potatoes:
C o st............................................
Amount..................................... .pounds..
Fruit, cost........................................
Macaroni, oat meal, etc., cost.......
Coffee, cocoa, and tea:
Cost..............................................
Amount..................................... .pounds..
Sugar:
Cost.............................................
Amount..................................... .pounds..
Sirups, condiments, etc., cost___
Meals away from home...................
Total expenditure for food:
Per w e e k ............................................
Per year.....................................
$3.50
1
5. 55
a 66
l T
«
382
N o t e — T otals are found by converting the totals in foreign money into United States money, and may differ from true totals.
Authority for above ta b le : Report of an inquiry by the Board of Trade for both Houses of the English Parliament, 1908, as to cost of living
In German to w n s; 1909, as to cost of living in French towns.
89032—8445
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
As Exhibit No. 7, I submit the income and cost of living in the United States of workingmen’s families.
E xhibit 7.
Workingmen’s families, income and cost of living in the United States, 1891.
Number
of fami-
Geographical division.
noted.
Average
size of
family.
Average income of
family.
Annual.
Weekly.
Average expenditure
of family.
Annual.
Weekly.
Average expenditure
for food.
Annual.
Weekly.
North Atlantic States................................................................................................
South Atlantic States................................................................................................
North Central States..................................................................................................
South Central States..................................................................................................
Western States............................................................................................................
1,415
219
721
122
90
5.25
5.30
5.46
5.65
4.69
$834.83
762.68
842.60
715.46
891.52
$16.05
14.67
16.20
13.76
17.15
$778.04
700.62
785.95
690.11
751.46
$14.%
13.47
15.11
13.27
14.45
$338.10
298.64
321.60
292.68
308.53
$6.50
5.74
6.18
5.36
5.32
United States....................................................................................................
2,567
5.31
827.19
15.91
768.54
14.78
326.90
6.99
Authority for above tab le: Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, United States, No. 59, July, 1905.
As Exhibit No. 8 I submit the quantity and value of the food
consumed by workingmen’s families in the United States per
week, 1901:
E
x h ib it
8.
Quantity and value of certain articles of food consumed by workingmen’s
families in the United States per week, 1901.
(Average income, $14.78 per week. Number of families, 2 ,567.)
Article.
Amount.
$0.56
1.97
.15
.32
.41
.05
.73
.25
.68
.04
.31
.30
.11
.39
17.95
14.78
1.54
19.7
13.7
.31
3.87
17.0
.48
1.10
5.16
Bread and flour.................................................................... pounds..
.............................................................. do___
Meats.........
Cheese.................................................................................... pounds..
Butter and lard......................................................................... do----Potatoes...................................................................................... do___
Coffee and tea..............................................................................do___
Sugar............................................................................................ d o ....
Condiments, molasses, etc........................................ ..........................
Other food...............................................................................................
Total expended for food per week...........................................
Cost.
6.27
_
326.90
received .
F uture t a r if f s should be based upon s u c h in for
m a tio n COMPILED BY EXPERTS EMPLOYED FOR THE FURPOSE. THIS
WOULD GIVE A PROPER BASIS FOR DETERMINING THE DIFFERENCE IN
COST OF PRODUCTION AT HOME AND ABROAD, AND FOR DETERMINING
THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE AMERICAN MANUFACTURER WOULD BE
PROTECTED IN PERCENTAGES OVER AND ABOVE THE DIFFERENCE IN
THE COST OF PRODUCTION, AND WOULD ESTABLISH A SOUND FOUNDA
TION UPON WHICirTO WRITE A TARIFF FOR REVENUE WHICH WOULD
AFFORD A LEGITIMATE AND REASONABLE INCIDENTAL PROTECTION,
WITHOUT GIVING SHELTER TO MONOPOLY'.
It will be observed from these tables the vital fact that the
American laborer in the protected industries, and especially in
the cotton and woolen industries, does not receive the enormous
wages in comparison with the European workman in like indus
tries which the advocates o f high tariff would have us believe.
On the contrary, their wages are very little, if any, better than
those o f the European workman, and that the workman in the
United States, especially in the textiles, has been compelled to
supplement his own wages by compelling his wife and his
daughter and his children of tender years to help earn sufficient
to enable them to keep body and soul together.
THE
E X TR E M E
USE OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE RACE FOR MONEY
MAKING.
An untutored, full-blood Sioux Indian was taken East and
shown the glories o f its civilization and, when he had been sur
feited with sight-seeing, the question was asked him, what had
As Exhibit No. 9 I submit the weekly rents workingmen pay struck him as the most important thing he saw, and he replied:
in England, Germany, France, and United States.
“ The way in which the white man makes his little children
work.”
E x h ib it 9.
So evil has been this result o f a monopoly-breaking tariff in
W e e k l y r e n t s in E n g l a n d , G e r m a n y , F r a n c e , a n d U n i t e d S t a t e s .
this Nation that a general alarm has been widely excited, and
various States and committees throughout the Nation are en
United
London. Berlin.
Tenements.
Paris.
gaged in attempting its correction. (Proceedings o f the fifth
States.
annual conference, Chicago, 111., National Child Labor Commit
tee, 105 East Twenty-second street, New York.
Two-room..........................................................
$1.46
$1.34
$1.12
Bulletin No. 69, on Child Labor, Department o f Commerce
1.82
1.98
1.46 | «$1.91
and Labor, shows that 26 per cent of the male children of the
Four-room. .
............................................
2.19
1.67
United States between 10 and 15 years of age are breadwinners;
-----° Average of 2,567 families, 1901, irrespective of size of tenement, in 1.264,000 male children between 10 and 15 years are breadwin
total United States.
ners; 485,000 female children between 10 and 15 years are
Keport of board of trade to P arliam ent: (1 9 0 8 ) cost of living in breadwinners.
german to w n s; (1 9 0 9 ) cost of living in French tow n s; (1 9 08 ) cost of
2. If the number o f children over 15, wage-earners, and not
nving of working classes, United Kingdom.
yet adults were classified, it would be found very large. Table
164, Census Bulletin, page 69, for example, gives the number
Exhibit No. 10 is the per cent of income o f workingmen’s of children at home, at school, and employed as breadwinners
families spent for food.
in families in which there are female textile workers 10 to 14
Exhibit 10.
years o f age, for Chicago, and New York, and out of 3,595 chil
P e r c e n t o f in c o m e o f w o r k in g m e n ’s fa m ilie s s p e n t fo r fo o d .
dren over 15 years o f age, 190 were at home, 52 at school, and
3,353 employed in gainful occupations. No record is made by
the Census of children not employed in gainful occupations un
United
Ger
tier 10 y e a rs o f age, n or ov e r 15 y e a rs o f a g e ; so th a t it, is
King
France,
United
Limit of income.
many,
dom,
1905.
probably no exaggeration to state that four or five million of
States.
1905.
1905.
children are engaged in labor when they ought to be in school
or at play.
By Census Volume 2, page cxxxi, it is shown that the number
Per cent. Per cent. Per cent . Per cent.
o f females engaged in gainful occupations, outside o f domestic
66
$6.G8-$7.30 per week.........................................
62
59
65
$7.30-$8.52 per week.........................................
service was 5,329,292, and the probable number of women and
59
58
61
$8.52-$9.73 per week.........................................
58
56
girls now engaged in gainful occupations will probably exceed
seven millions; 28 per cent being so employed in Massachusetts,
° 2,567 workingmen’s families.
29.6 per cent in Rhode Island, 24.3 per cent in Connecticut, 20.8
A u th o rity : Bulletin o f United States Bureau of Labor No. 59.
Re per cent in New Jersey, 23 per cent in New York and 7.9 per
port of board of trade to Parliament on cost of living ( 1 9 0 8 - 9 ) .
cent in Oklahoma. The reason for women being compelled to
l I t would not be d iff ic u l t to determ in e w it h co m parative go into competition with men in the gainful occupations is
^PRECISION THE DIFFERENCE IN TIIE COST OF PRODUCTION MEASURED largely because the men o f the family do not receive enough to
,JY THE COST OF MATERIALS AND OF WAGES, THE RELATIVE EFFI maintain the family and enable the women to have the means
CIENCY OF LAROR, AND TIIE PURCHASING POWER OF THE WAGE they require and to remain at home where they properly belong
A u th o rity : Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, No. 59, July, 1905.
J °2
4J
890 3 2 — 8445
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
in a civilization of a high order. The driving of the American
woman from the home where her activities would best be em
ployed in promoting her own happiness and the happiness of
mankind, and where her services to the race would be best em
ployed in raising children and teaching them the lessons of re
ligion, morality, and the sturdy virtues taught by our fore
fathers, is not the least of the crushing effects of modern monop
oly engendered by a monopoly-protecting tariff, and by the un
restrained avarice and ambition with their false standards of
life which are thus set up in a mad race for power.
It will be seen by the wages in the textile industries that the
cotton spinners of Germany and France are paid more in money
than in the United States, the weavers less, and the mule spinners
o f France more, than those o f the United States; that the
woolen spinners of Germany and France are paid more money
than they are in the United States, while the weavers are
paid less, but in considering the fact that the money of the
cotton spinners and woolen spinners of France and Germany
will buy 50 per cent more than in the United States, the
wages they receive are decidedly better. When it is remem
bered the American workman turns out twice as much as
the German or Frenchman, then the ungenerous treatment of
the American cotton and woolen spinners is obvious. It is also
obvious that the plea o f the Massachusetts and Rhode Island
manufacturer that the h ig h e r w ages he is compelled to pay his
cotton and wool spinners in order to meet the pauper labor com
petition of France and Germany is a monumental falsehood
used to hoodwink the patriotism o f the American people and
lead them to tax themselves for the poor spinner’s sake who
toil in the cotton and woolen mills.
It is interesting to observe that labor in the protected indus
tries of Germany, France, and the United Kingdom are paid
much smaller wages than in the unprotected industries, and
labor might well question the value of a protective system
which operates throughout the world to give them less remu
neration for their labor than in the unprotected industries.
A COMPETITION-PROHIBITING TARIFF HAS SERVED
TO INCREASE PRICES AND LOWER THE PURCHASING
POWER OF ALL WAGES AND OF ALL INCOMES.
In the Journal o f the Royal Statistical Society for March,
1909, page 68, A. Sauerbeck, an acknowledged authority, gives
a comparison of world prices, based on 45 commodities, and
using as an index the standards fixed by the period of eleven
years, 1867-1877, which in the aggregate was the equivalent of
the average o f the twenty-five years preceding; that is, from
1853-1877. The index number is 100.
Prices of commodities in 1908.
[B y A. Sauerbeck.]
The following table shows the course of prices of 45 commodities during the last twenty years as compared with the standard period of
yeaISv,1 8 6 7 -1 877> which in the aggregate is equivalent to the average of the twenty-live years, 1S 5 3 -1 8 77 .
(See the Society's Journal,
1886, pp. t>92 and 6 4 8 ; and 1893, pp. 220 and 2 4 7 .)
■
(Summary of index numbers.
Year.
Vege
table
food
(com,
etc.).
Animal
food
(meat,
etc.).
Groups of articles, 1867— 8 7 7 = 1 0 0 .)
1
Sugar,
coffee,
and tea.
Total
food.
Min
erals.
1889.
1890.
1891.
1892.
1893.
1894.
1895.
1896.
1897.
1898.
1899.
1900.
1901.
1902.
1903.
1904.
1905.
1906.
1907.
1908.
65
65
75
65
59
55
54
53
60
67
C
O
62
62
63
62
63
63
62
69
70
86
82
81
84
85
80
78
73
79
77
79
So
85
87
84
83
87
89
88
89
75
70
71
69
75
65
62
59
52
51
53
54
46
41
44
50
52
46
48
48
..
73
77
72
66
61
62
05
68
65
69
67
67
66
68
69
G
9
72
72
75
S
O
76
' 71
68
64
62
63
66
70
92
108
89
82
82
81
87
101
107
89
Average:
1899-1908.
1S88-1S97.
187S-18S7.
64
62
79
86
81
95
48
66
76
68
70
84
92
70
73
It will thus be observed that as compared with 100 for 18531877, the grand total index number of world prices for 1889
was 72, and for 1899 to 1908 it was 72, a fall in prices due to
the demonetization of silver throughout the world.
It will also be observed that the index number for 1889 and
1905 was 72; for 1908 it was 73, thus indicating a singular
stability in the grand total of the world prices (London), since
1889, notwithstanding important intermediate variations.
Conceding that the volume of metallic money in the world,
together with the law of supply and demand o f other materials,
are the determining factors fixing the average o f world prices,
it Should irethat the wonderful inei-OiU*, in. tho output
o f modem machinery as applied to all classes o f products seems
to have been about equaled by the output of metallic money,
whose annual rate o f gold output has approximately doubled
since 1896.
This table also shows the effect upon world prices by the dis
turbance o f commercial credits o f the world by financial panic;
the panic o f 1893 being followed by the lowest world prices in
a generation.
It would seem to follow that the lowering o f prices stimulated
purchases and exchanges and led to a corresixmding reaction.
The panic of 1907 was followed by an immediate reaction in
world prices.
It is important to point out that, notwithstanding the in
creased output o f merchantable articles, the increase o f gold
89032— 8445
Tex
tiles.
Sun
dry
mate
rials.
Total
mate
rials.
Grand
total.
Sil
ver.
Wheat
harvest.
Average
price of
consols.
70
66
59
57
59
53
52
51
51
51
58
66
C
O
71
66
71
72
80
77
62
68
69
69
67
68
64
65
63
62
63
65
71
71
71
69
67
68
74
78
73
70
71
68
65
65
60
60
60
59
61
70
S
O
72
71
72
72
75
83
86
74
72
72
72
68
68
63
62
61
62
64
68
75
70
69
69
70
72
77
80
73
70.2
78.4
74.1
65.4
58.6
47. 6
49.1
50.5
45.3
44 .3
45.1
46.4
44.7
39.6
40.7
43.4
45.7
50.7
49.6
40.1
103
106
108
91
90
106
91
116
100
120
113
99
106
113
104
93
113
116
117
111
98
961
95*
96}
981
101
106J
111
112}
111
107
991
94
94}
90}
S8}
831}
88}
84
86
67
59
71
71
66
81
75
65
70
72
67
79
44.6
61.0
82.1
109
101
97
92}
101}
99}
Average
Bank of
England
rate.
Per cent.
3,*,
4f t
3ft
2ft
3*
2ft
2
2ft
3}
3}
4
3}
It
3ft
3
4}
4ft
3
3ft
circulation available for the use o f the world markets has
been very large, and that this probably accounts for the sub
stantial stability of world prices since 1889. These figures are
of intense interest when compared with the chauges in prices
which have taken place in the United States. Taking the
tables o f the Statistical Abstract o f 1907,- it will be seen that
middling cotton which was 11.07 cents in 1890 was 11.5 cents in
in 1906, having reached a very low price of 6.94 cents in
1894, just after the panic, and a still lower point o f 5.94 cents
in 1898, just after the Dingley bill passed: while standard
sheetings for 1890 was 7 cents, and 1906, 7.25 cents, reaching
a low point o f 5.11 coats in 1S94, just after the panic, and itslowest point, 4.2 cents, in 1898, just after the passage o f the
Dingley bill.
In like manner standard drillings and other cotton cloths
fluctuated similarly following the panic and following the
Dingley bill.
Mr. President, I now submit a table (No. 202) from the
Abstract of Our National Statistics (1907), giving the rela
tive wholesale prices of raw and o f manufactured commodi
ties of 1890 to 1906 and per cent o f Increase in prices for
1906 over prices for each preceding year; and also Table
203, giving the relative wholesale prices of commodities from
1890 to 1906 and the per cent o f increase in prices from
1906 over prices for each preceding year by group o f com
modities.
23
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
Great increase in prices under Dingley A ct.
Relative wholesale prices
of raw and of manufactured commodities, 1890 to 1906, and per cent of
increase in prices for 1906 over prices for each preceding year.
Manufactured com
modities.
Raw commodities.
Calendar year.
1890.
1891..
1892.
1893..
1894.
1895__
1896.
1897..
1898.
1899.
1900..
1901..
1902.
1903.
1904..
1905..
1906.
Rela
tive
price.
Per cent of
increase in
1906 over
each preced
ing.
9.5
8.3
16.7
20.6
35.1
37.3
49.9
43.7
33.9
18.9
12.5
13.0
2.9
2.6
5.2
3.9
Rela
tive
price.
8.3
9.9
15.2
14.8
25.6
29.4
32.3
35.0
30.3
20.8
10.3
12.8
9.9
9.1
9.3
6.1
Per cent of
increase in
1906 over
each preced
ing.
112.9
111.7
106.1
105.6
96.1
93.6
90.4
89.7
93.4
101.7
110.5
108.5
112.9
113.6
113.0
115.9
122.4
112.3
110.6
105.6
105.9
96.8
94.0
91.9
90.1
93.3
100.7
110.2
107.8
110.6
111.5
111.3
114.6
121.6
115.0
116.3
107.9
104.4
93.2
91.7
84.0
87.6
94.0
105.9
111.9
111.4
122.4
122.7
119.7
121.2
125.9
8.4
9.6
15.4
15.9
27.4
30.8
35.4
36.5
31.0
20.4
10.8
12.8
8.4
7.7
8.3
5.6
« ote.— From reports of the Bureau of Labor, Department of Com
merce and Labor. This table summarizes wholesale prices of 258 staple
commodities. The commodities designated as “ Raw ” are such as are
marketed in their natural state and also such as have been subjected
t0 or>ly a preliminary manufacturing process; this group includes 50
articles. The commodities designated as “ Manufactured ” are such as
nave been subjected to more than a preliminary factory manipulation
and in which the manufacturing labor cost constitutes an important
element in the p rice; this group includes 208 articles. A relative price,
or index number, as it is technically called, of any article is the per cent
wnich the price of that article at any date is of the price of the same
article at a date or period which has been selected as the base or stand
ard. The base selected by the Bureau of Labor for this compilation is
the average price for the ten-year period 1890 to 1899.
The relative prices
shown under each group are simple averages of the relatives of all ar
ticles included within the group. Average price for 1 8 9 0 -1 8 9 9 = 1 0 0 .
E x h i b i t 0.
Relative wholesale prices o f commodities, 1S90 to 1906, and per cent of
increase in prices for 1906 over prices for each preceding year, by
groups of commodities.
Farm products.
Food, etc.
Per cent
Per cent
of in
of in
crease in
Relative
Relative crease in
1906 over
1906 over
price.
price.
each pre
each pre
ceding
ceding
year.
year.
Calendar year.
1890
1891
1892.
1893.
1894.
1895.
1896.
1897
1898
1899
1900.
1901.
1902.
1903.
1904.
1905.
1906.
1907.
110.0
121.5
111.7
107.9
95.9
93.3
78.3
85.2
96.1
100.0
109.5
116.9
130.5
118.8
126.2
124.2
123.6
12.4
1.7
10.7
14.6
28.9
32.5
57.9
45.1
28.6
23.6
12.9
5.7
05.3
4.0
02.1
0.5
112.4
115.7
103.6
110.2
99.8
94.6
83.8
87.7
94.4
98.3
104.2
105.9
111.3
107.1
107.2
108.7
112. C
0.2
02.7
8.7
113.5
111.3
109.0
107.2
96.1
92.7
91.3
91.1
93.4
96.7
106.8
101.0
102.0
106.0
109. 8
112.0
120.0
Decrease.
89052— 8445
5.7
7.8
10.1
11.9
24.9
29.4
31.4
31.7
28.5
24.1
12.4
18.8
17.6
12.6
9.3
7.1
104.7
102.7
101.1
100.0
92.4
9a 1
104.3
96.4
95.4
105.0
120.9
119.5
134.3
149.3
132.6
128.8
129.5
13.4
21.0
27.5
34.3
49.1
47.0
44.3
56.1
56.5
17.9
12.2
20.8
15.4
15.0
23.4
10.4
111.8
108.4
102.8
101.9
96.3
94.1
93.4
90.4
95.8
105.8
115.7
116. 7
lia s
121.4
122. 7
127.7
140.1
25.3
29.2
36.3
37.5
45.5
48.9
50.0
55.0
46.2
32.4
21.1
20.1
17.9
15.4
14.2
9.G
House furnishing
goods.
Per cent
Per cent
of in
of in
crease in
crease in
Relative
Relative
1906 over
1906 over
price.
price.
each pre
each pre
ceding
ceding
year.
year.
Calendar year.
110.2
1890.
1891.
1892.
1893.
1894.
1895.
1896.
1S97.
1898.
1899.
1X0.
1901.
1902.
1903.
1904.
1905.
1906
103.6
102.9
100.5
89.8
8-7.9
92.6
94.4
106.6
111.3
115.7
115.2
114.2
112.6
110.0
109.1
101.2
0 8 .2
02.3
o l.7
12! 7
15.1
9.3
7.2
05.1
09.1
012.5
0 12.2
a ll.4
a 10.1
o8.0
“ 7.2
Miscellaneous.
111.1
110.2
106.5
104.9
100.1
96.5
94.0
89.8
92.0
95.1
106.1
110.9
112. 2
113.0
111.7
109.1
111.0
00.
.7
4.2
5.8
10.9
15.0
18.1
23.6
20.7
10.7
4.6
.1
01. 1
0 1. 8
o. 6
1.7
All commodities.
Per cent
Per cent
of in
of in
crease in Relative crease in
Relative
1906 over
1906 over
price.
price.
each pre
each pre
ceding
ceding
year.
year.
Calendar year.
8.1
1.2
5.1
5.0
3.6
23.7
26.1
28.1
29.5
40.2
32.0
24.2
34.3
35.7
23.3
7.1
8.4
“ 3.6
“ 13.3
“ 2.3
.5
119.2
111.7
106.0
100.7
90.7
92.0
93.7
86.6
86.4
114.7
120.5
111.9
117.2
117.6
109.6
122.5
135.2
Drugs and chem
icals.
6.3
Per cent
Percent
of in
of in
crease in
Relative
Relative crease in
1906 over
1906 over
price.
price.
each proeach precoding
year.
year.
1890..........................
1891................................................................
1892......................................................................
1893......................................................................
1894......................................................................
1895......................................................................
1896......................................................................
1897......................................................................
1898.....................................................................
1899.....................................................................
1900......................................................................
1901......................................................................
1902......................................................................
1903......................................................................
1904.....................................................................
1905......................................................................
1906......................................................................
1890.....................................................................
1891
.................................
1892.....................................................................
1893.....................................................................
1894.....................................................................
1895.....................................................................
1896.....................................................................
1897.....................................................................
1898.....................................................................
1899.....................................................................
1900.....................................................................
1901.....................................................................
1902.....................................................................
1903.....................................................................
1904.....................................................................
1905.....................................................................
1900
............................................
2.2
Cloths and clothing. Fuel and lighting.
Lumber and build
ing materials.
Per cent
Per cent
of in
of in
crease in Relative crease in
Relative 1906 over
1906 over
price.
price.
each pre
each pre
ceding
ceding
year.
year.
Calendar year.
12.8
19.0
34.4
28.4
19.3
14.5
117.8
Calendar year.
Metals and imple
ments.
All commodities.
Per cent of
increase in
1906 over
each preced
ing.
Rela
tive
price.
Relative wholesale prices o f commodities, 1890 to 1906, etc.— Continued.
1890.....................................................................
.............................................................................
.............................................................................
.............................................................................
1894.....................................................................
1
..........................................................
1890.....................................................................
1897.....................................................................
1898
..............................................................
1899.....................................................................
1900.....................................................................
110.3
109.4
106.2
105.9
99.8
94.5
91.4
92.1
92.4
97.7
109. 8
9.8
10.7
14.0
14.4
21.3
28.1
22. 5
31.5
31.1
24.0
10.3
112.9
111.7
1902......................................................................
1903.....................................................................
1904.....................................................................
1905.....................................................................
1906.....................................................................
114.1
113.6
111.7
112.8
121.1
6 .1
112.9
6.6
a4
7.4
113.6
113.0
115.9
122.4
m i
105.6
96.1
93.0
90.4
S9.7
93.4
101.7
110.5
8.4
9.6
15.4
15.9
27.4
30.8
35.4
36.5
31.0
20.4
10.8
8 .4
7 .7
8 .3
5 .6
• Decrease.
N ote .— From reports of the Bureau of Labor. Department of Com
merce and Labor. The group farm products includes 16 com m odities;
food, etc., 53 : cloths and clothing, 75 ; fuel and lighting, 1 3 ; metals and
implements, 3 8 ; lumber and building material, 27 ; drugs and chemicals,
9 ; house furnishing goods, 1 4 ; and the miscellaneous group, 1 3 . Aver
age price for 1 8 9 0 - 1 8 9 9 = 1 0 0 .
I also submit Dun’s tables showing the varations in prices in
the United States.
It should be kept clearly in mind that the federal census is, to
a very appreciable degree, influenced by the manufacturing
industries of the country favorably to themselves, and this dif-
1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
m
ference is demonstrated by Dun’s tables, which show the increase
o f prices to be much larger in the United States than as shown
by Census Abstract Tables 202 and 203:
Leading classes of necessary articles of daily consumption— Prices, at
primary markets, from July 1, 1860, to M a y 1, 1907.
[Index number, from Dun’s Review.]
Breadstuffs. Meats.
Date.
July 1—
1860............................
1861............................
1862...........................
1863...........................
1864...........................
1865............................
1866...........................
1867...........................
1868...........................
1 8 69.........................
1870............................
1871............................
1872...........................
1873...........................
1874...........................
1875...........................
1876...........................
1877...........................
1878...........................
1879...........................
1880...........................
1 8 8 1 ................
1882...........................
1883...........................
1884...........................
1 8 8 5 ................
1886...........................
1 8 8 7 ................
1888...........................
1889.........................
1890.........................
1891........................
1892...........................
1893......................
1894................
189o. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1897—January 1 . . ” ] " ’
July (low ).. ”
1898—JiuiUiify 1 . . . . . . . .
July 1.............
July 1....................
1900—January 1.........
July 1..................
1901—January 1.............
July 1 . . . . . . . . . . . .
1902—January 1.............
July 1....................
1903—January 1.............
July 1....................
1904—January 1.............
July 1....................
1905—January 1.............
July 1....................
1906—January 1.............
July 1....................
1907 January 1.............
May 1....................
Dairy
and Other Cloth
food.
ing.
gar
den.
Dolls.
20.530
15.749
18.057
26.154
45.616
25.461
31.471
36.537
38.416
29.116
25.322
24.809
22.171
20.460
25.657
24.848
18.777
21.812
15.672
17.054
17.461
20.369
25.494
19.018
17.871
16.370
15.311
15.156
16.984
14.351
14.867
19.782
17.426
14.963
15.115
14.765
10.564
11.729
10.587
13.511
12.783
13.816
13. 483
13.254
14.898
14.486
14.904
20.002
20.534
17.104
17. 473
17.102
18.244
18.278
18.831
16. 554
17.923
16.079
18.165
Dolls.
12.662
10.813
13.406
13.530
26.053
18.049
23.472
18.418
23.614
18.121
16.112
20.799
16.019
15.629
19.142
14.918
15.912
11.790
10.608
10.253
12.594
11.311
14.685
12.250
11.369
10.872
10.241
11.188
11,849
9.695
10.711
12.455
10.403
11.710
10.394
9.874
7.872
10.456
8.714
12.371
9.437
11. 458
10.974
13.702
10.901
15.556
11.030
15.248
12.557
14. 613
13.083
15.287
10.648'
13.948
9.982
14.399
12.590
14.965
14. 461
Dolls.
8.973
7.485
7.150
10.115
15.685
16.112
17.153
14.278
13.210
13.181
14.161
12.177
11.055
10.114
11.560
13.287
10.726
10.036
8.181
8.239
9.230
11.381
13.740
11.210
11.172
9.205
8.906
8.667
9.416
8.244
8.036
9.217
8.700
10.135
9.389
8.622
7.058
7.327
7.529
7.336
7.694
7.520
7.988
7.258
8.906
8.407
9.430
9.670
11.628
9.522
9.269
8.138
9.033
7.950
8.614
8.426
9.677
9.350
9.641
Dolls.
8.894
7.653
10.987
16.359
27.303
21.057
20.821
20.167
19.720
16.347
13.308
13.823
14.845
13.625
13.678
14.418
12.914
13.321
11.346
9.884
11.539
11.663
11.627
10.726
9.323
8.712
8.570
9.252
9.917
10.912
9.749
9.339
8.733
9.188
8.478
8.689
8.529
8.170
7.887
8.312
8.826
9.096
9.157
9.200
9.482
9. 504
9.086
8.952
8.748
9.418
9.186
9.653
10.406
10.699
9.922
9.822
9.645
9.760
9.824
Dolls.
22.439
21.147
28.413
45.679
73.485
49.307
45.377
38.169
35.694
35.309
31.480
30.624
32.427
29.411
27.260
25.318
21.747
21.850
19.836
20.420
21.984
20.982
21.202
20.209
19.014
17.740
18.063
18.174
17.447
17.107
17.264
16.501
15.648
15.871
13.860
15.315
13.602
12. 407
13. 808
14.654
14.663
14.150
15.021
17. 484
16.324
16.024
15.098
15. 547
15.533
15.938
17.136
17.316
16. 514
16.319
17.986
19.313
19.177
19.637
20.098
Met
als.
Dolls.
25.851
22.500
23.207
37.079
59. L
92
38.956
41.762
35.426
27.385
28.355
26.612
27. 371
32.643
32.298
25.254
23.515
20.152
15.578
15.789
15.149
18.?08
19.295
19.832
18.171
16.272
14.132
14.166
16.035
15.366
14.782
15.506
15.107
14.827
14.030
12.015
11.021
13.232
13.014
11.642
11.572
11.343
11.843
15.635
18.085
14. .834
15.810
15.344
15.375
16.084
17.185
16.544
15.887
15.428
16.188
15.916
17.141
16.649
18 087
17.524
Mis
cella Total.
neous.
Dolls.
15.842
16.573
17.290
24.264
31.653
25.551
27.922
25.529
24.786
24.201
21.786
21.907
21.319
21.355
19.582
18.398
15.951
15.160
14.836
16.286
17.139
16.900
16.650
15.764
14.685
13.666
13.669
15.153
14.155
14.600
15.416
13.691
14.252
14.716
14.041
13.233
13.520
12.399
12.288
12.184
12.522
12. 540
12.969
16.312
16.070
15.881
16.617
16.793
16. 826
16. 578
16.765
16.759
16.919
16.936
17.061
18.809
19. 555
19.386
19.242
Dolls.
115.101
101.920
118.510
173.180
278.987
194.436
207.978
188.524
182.825
164.630
148.781
151.510
150.479
143.089
143.133
134.702
116.479
109.547
96.268
97.285
108.655
111.901
123.230
107.248
99.706
90.697
89.226
93.624
95.134
89.691
91.549
96.092
90.105
90.613
83.292
81.519
74.317
75.502
72. 455
79.940
77.768
80.423
85.227
95.295
91. 415
95.668
91.509
101. 587
101.910
100.356
99. 4.56
100.142
97.192
100.318
98.312
104. 464
105.216
107.264
108.955
—
N ote .— In the above table the course of prices of commodities is
shown, and in each case the price is multiplied by the annual per capita
consumption, which precludes any one commodity having more than its
proper weight in the aggregate. Breadstuff's include many quotations
of wheat, corn, oats, rye, barley, beans, and p e ase ; meats include live
hogs, beef, sheep, and many provisions, lard, tallow, e t c .; dairy and
garden products embrace eggs, vegetables, fruits, milk, butter, cheese,
e t c .; other food includes fish, liquors, condiments, sugar, rice, tobacco,
e t c .; clothing covers the raw material of each industry, and many quo
tations of woolen, cotton, silk, and rubber goods, an well as hides,
leather, boots, and sh o es; metals include various quotations of pig iron
and partially manufactured and finished products, as well as the minor
metals, tin, lead, copper, etc., and coal and petroleum ; miscellaneous
includes many grades of hard and soft lumber, laths, l rick, lime, glass,
tu r p e n tin e ,
n e tn p ,
tin se e d o t i,
paints^- I t r t l l l w i oy n
n * etwugs. — l w i t i n t
decimal is given for accuracy of comparison.
There thus appears by Dun’s more accurate tables an in
crease from 1896 to May 1, 1907, o f 46.7 per cent on total aver
age o f prices of 1896, and on clothing the increase from January
1, 1897, to May 1, 1907, was 69 per cent, and on miscellaneous
articles was 55 per cent.
The two tables from our own census contain overwhelming
evidence o f the injurious results of the Dingley bill upon labor;
it shows, for example, Mr. President, that prices have been in
creased on raw commodities 25.9 per cent over the average
prices from 1890 to 1900, and 49.9 per cent over the prices o f raw
commodities under the Wilson bill.
89032— 8445
Our prices were already in 1906 much higher than in Europe,
so that these increases are the more striking.
Mr. President, do not the manufacturing classes themselves
see that such an enormous raise in prices of raw commodities
is injurious both to their domestic and foreign trade? Do they,
not see it necessarily limits the consumption of the people,
whose little salaries are fixed, whose little pension can not be
increased in dollars and cents, whose purchasing power is lim
ited to a fixed wage, a wage not exceeding, among the manu
facturing laboring classes, $160 per annum per capita ?
The obvious result is to restrict consumption o f goods, limit
the output of goods, lower the factory output, and limit the
demand for labor.
Mr. President, in like manner the increase of manufactured
commodities in price, including a group o f 208 articles, has
been 35 per cent since the lower prices under the Wilson bill
and an increase of 36.5 per cent upon all commodities above the
more reasonable prices under the Wilson bill.
What corresponding increase of wages has labor received?
Their wages are relatively less than they were ten years ago,
both in relation to the output of labor and in relation to the
purchasing power of the wage received; and the demand for
labor has been necessarily diminished by preventing the con
sumption of manufactured and other commodities, because o f
prices which could not be paid out of the limited number o f
dollars the ordinary American has received. Such a policy is
injurious to the manufacturer, to the wage-earner, to the com
mon citizen consumer, to the business men o f the entire Nation,
and to our national growth and development.
And differentiating these increases of prices, it will be seen by
Table 203 that the prices of 1906 for food are 34 per cent higher
than they were in 1896 under the Wilson bill; the cloths and.
clothing have increased 31.4 per cent above the prices of 1S96
under the Wilson b ill; that fuel and lighting have increased
40 per cent since 1894 under the Wilson bill; that metals and
metal implements have increased 56 per cent above the prices
under the Wilson b ill; that lumber and building material have
increased 55 per cent over the prices under the Wilson b ill;
that house furnishings have increased 23.6 per cent above the
lower prices o f the Wilson bill; and miscellaneous articles o f
various kinds have increased 32.5 per cent above the more
reasonable prices of the Wilson bill. Are the American people
utterly oblivious to these striking and conclusive facts?
It is perfectly obvious from Sauerbeck tables of the prices
o f the world and from Dunn’s table of American (United
States) prices that American (United States) prices have in
creased far beyond European prices since the low price of 1S96,
notwithstanding American (United States) prices were then
much higher than they were in Europe. It therefore follows,
beyond question, that the purchasing power of American wages,
even of the starvation wages paid in the cotton and woolen mills,
has been lowered in such a way as to greatly harm the Amer
ican workmen, even in protected industries, and has harmed
equally the entire American people, workmen, consumers gener
ally, and even the manufacturers, who are severely taxing each
other by high prices—the finished product o f the one being
the raw material of the other. The only people who have a net
profit are those who own and control the successful monopolies.
Is the Finance Committee so committed to the demands of
the representatives o f organized greed in this country that
they will refuse to deal justly by the American people?
Or do they believe that by making the rich richer and the
poor poorer they will receive adequate political benefit at the
hands of those whom they enrich?
I know, Mr. President, that it has been easy to finance Re
publican campaigns, and I know many good men have not
stopped to think that this money was extorted from the misery
and sweat o f helpless men, women, and children.
Members o f the Senate do not often visit the sweat shops;
n«r <K Ttoey
»
hw.ow *uu diRmnw of iko individuals'
who compose the weaker elements of our great Nation. I
remind them that 500,000 die annually by our neglect, as shown
by the comparison between the death rate o f New Zealand
and Australia, where better laws prevail, where the maxim of
the law is “ Better reduce want than increase wealth.”
Mr. President, I feel charged with a solemn duty to make a
record before the Senate o f these conditions, and I deem it a
great opportunity to have the privilege o f submitting a prayer
to the leaders of the Senate that they do not be unmindful or
inconsiderate o f the need and the rights of the inarticulate
mass, and that they do not lend too complacent attention to the
trained advocates of unsatisfied greed.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
25
Senator Orville H. Platt, the late distinguished Senator from T able I.— Showing differences in discounts between export and home
prices.
Connecticut, once said, in substance, in commenting on the faults
of the American legislator, that “ The American legislator should [By James G. Parsons, Senate Document No. 54, Sixty-first Congress,
first session.]
not be charged with incompetency. As a rule, he is fairly well
qualified; neither can he be justly charged with dishonesty.
Per
There are a few who may be dishonest, perhaps, but they do
Export discount Home discount cent
Articles and description.
differ
from list.
from list.
not exercise any control of legislation. The fault of the Ameri
ence.
can legislator is *good-fellowship ’ and doing for a friend
what under no other circumstances would the legislator for a
Per cent.
Per cent.
moment consider. For that reason,” said he, “ I deem it the Auger bits:
Irwin’s solid center...................
39
50 and 10
60,10, and 10
highest legislative virtue to be cross and crabbed to all the
334
60
Snell’s...................................................
70
world, especially in the last ten days of the session.”
39
Snell’s “ King” ...................................
50
60 and 10
handles, Gunn’s No. 5, adjustIt will be thus seen that, from Sauerbeck’s tables, the increase Auger and ratchet..........................
able
18
15 and 10
35
of the world prices has been much lower than the increases of Bells, Texas cow.......................................
11
50
50 and 10
prices in the United States, and that this difference must be Bird cages, Hendryx’s brass.................
40
30
50
Bolt clippers, “ New Easy” ....................
18
50,10, and 10
60,10, and 5
accounted for in some reasonable manner.
The most natural way in which to account for it is to show Bolts:
Carriage, | by 6 inches and smaller.
25
75 and 10
80 and 10
that the prices in the United States are artificially controlled
Machine, | by 4 inches and smaller.
19
75,10, and 5
80 and 10
17
Tire......................................................
80
80,10, and 5
by monopoly.
Borers, bunghole, Enterprise.................
27
25
40 and 2
And this average high increase must he interpreted in the light Braces:
Fray’s genuine “ SpofTords” ...........
33]
60
70
of a great offset of the lowering of prices of all products pro
Fray’s ratchet, Nos. 81-161..............
50
39
C and 10
O
duced by the American people of which monopoly controls the
Fray’s ratchet, Nos. 83-143..............
39
50
60 and 10
Fray’s ratchet, Nos. 62-142..............
price. For example, crude oil is produced by Oklahoma in vast
50
66]
70
Fray’s ratchet, Nos. 66-166..............
50
39
G and 10
O
quantities—approximately 50,000,000 barrels per annum—which
Fray’s sleeve, Nos. 207-214...............
54
50
60,10, and 10
sells for less than 1 cent a gallon, while the refined product
Fray’s sleeve, Nos. 407-414..............
39
50
60 and 10
Fray’s sleeve, Nos. 606-614..............
50
39
retails for over 11 cents a gallon. It costs half a cent a gallon
60 and 10
306-314................
664
50
70
to refine it. The low price is fixed by the Standard on the Can Fray’s plain, Nos................................
openers, “ King”
0
33]
25
crude and the high price is fixed by the Standard on the refined. Cartridges, rim fire....................................
64
50
60,10,10, and 6
11
And the increase o f all prices is in the face o f the vital fact Chains, kennel...........................................
C
O
60 and 10
Enterprise...........................
11
20 and 25
40 and 10
that monopoly fixes an extremely low price on the articles Coffee mills, and hangers, Lane’s...........
Door rollers
17
60 and 10
60,10,10, and 5
produced by the people o f which the monopoly controls the Gauges, Disston’s steel and center........
12
25,7], and 10
45
price. The average high price would he far higher except for Harness snaps:
Covert’s “ Trojan” .............................
33]
50 and 10
40
the very low price fixed by monopoly on its purchases, as on
Covert’s “ Y ankee” ...........................
37
50
30 and 2
crude oil. This is not only true with regard to oil, but also is
Covert’s “ Derby” .............................
39
25
true with regard to cattle, hogs, sheep, hides, wool, various Lawn sprinklers, Enterprise..................
40 and 2
30
19
11
40 and 5
33] and 5
minerals, tobacco, and so forth. This low price o f articles Levels, Starrett’s bench and pocket___
Oilstones, “ Lily White” and “ Wabought by monopoly prevented the general average from reach
shita” No. 1 - .- ......................................
50
33]
33]
72
60 and 10
ing the high point which they would otherwise reach in the Plumbs, levels, etc., Disston’s............... 70,10,10,10, and 5
Sausage stuflers, Enterprise...................
18
40 and 2
25 and 74
statistical tables is a factor of great importance.
Saws:
__ ___
Without regard to statistics, everybody knows that the prices
Disston’s Nos. 7,107, 107], 3, and 1.
45 and 7]
30 and 74
27
Disston’s combination......................
45 and 7]
30 and 7]
27
are now very much higher than they have ever been.
Disston’s Nos. 12,16, D 8 ,120,76,8..
40 and 10
25 and 7]
28
The schedules o f this bill are approximately 50 per cent on
Disston’s compass and keyhole___
40 and 10
28
25 and 74
the value of proposed imports and this is proof that the prices
Disston’s butcher...............................
40
50
30
Disston’s framed wood.....................
50
25
50
in the United States are 50 per cent higher than they are in
Disston’s band....................................
70,10, and 10
60
65
Europe and abroad on the articles of these schedules by the Scroll saws, Barnes’s velocipede............
20
14
30
70,10,10, and 10
70
37
open confession of the managers o f this bill, and I therefore do Screw-driver s.Disston’s electric............
40 and 10
25 and 74
Smoked beef shavers, Enterprise.........
28
not need to furnish further proof of this matter as the schedules
confess that the prices in this country are approximately 50 Squares:
60 and 10
72
70,10,10,10, and 5
Disston’s try, rosewood handle___
45
25,7$, and 10
13
Disston’s steel.....................................
per cent higher than they are abroad on articles affected by the
33]
Traps, Lovell’s rat and mouse...............
50
331
present tariff law.
Trowels, Disston’s brick..........................
25
45 and 7]
47
Mr. President, it is of great importance to observe these dif Vises:
60
Armstrong’s plain and hinged........
80 and 10
122
ferences between our present prices and the increase o f our
Armstrong’s pipe...............................
50
60
25
present prices as compared with the increase of the prices of
30 and 10
26
50
Bonney’s..............................................
the world, because it thus enables us to determiue to what ex
tent local conditions have raised our prices above the level of
T able I I .— Showing difference between export and home prices of certain
the prices o f the world.
specified articles.
world prices and prices in th e united sta te s — r is e in prices in
t iie united states not due to increase in per capita circula
t io n .
At first thought it might occur to some one that the higher
prices in the United States were due to the larger per capita
circulation, but this conclusion is impossible because, while our
Per capita circulation December 31, 1900 (Statistical Abstract,
1907, Table 269), was $33.99 per capita, France had a per capita
of $40.88 and Germany $25.03 and the British Empire $28.12,
with no substantial differences in competitive prices at London,
thus exhibiting the interesting fact that this enormous increase
o f prices in the United States, and the fact that United States
prices are much higher than the level of world prices, is not
due to our increased circulating medium, but is due to the
monopolies in this country which have for commercial purpose
raised these prices in America far above the prices in the mar
kets of the world.
That these high prices are not necessary for the maintenance
o f a reasonable profit is shown by the table o f lower prices at
which these same American goods are sold abroad by the pro
tected monopolies in this country.
A few o f these prices are submitted to prove that the prices
in the United States under monopoly will average 50 per cent
higher than in the markets o f the w orld :
As evidence o f this I submit a table from James G. Parsons
showing the differences in discounts between export and home
prices.
89032— 8445------ 4
Articles and description.
Export Home
price.
price.
Auger bits:
Irwin’s solid center, 4-1G......................................... per doz.. $1.30
Irwin’s solid center, 1G-1G............................................. do___
2.92
Auger handles, Gunn’s No. 5..............................................do—
9.75
Bird cages, Hendryx's No. 316........................................... do___ 13.00
Bolt clippers, “ Easy” and “ New Easy,” No. 1........... each..
1.71
Bolts:
Carriage, | by 6 inches.............................................. per 100..
.60
Machine, | by 4 inches.................................................. do___
.57
Tire, 1 by Gimflicr.. . . . .................................................do___
. 65
Braces:
Fray’s genuine “ Spoflord,” No. 107.....................per doz..
6.30
Fray’s ratchet, No. 81................................................... do___ 10. 44
Fray’s ratchet, No. 62...................................................do____ a 90
Fray’s sleeve, No. 207....................................................do___
7.13
Fray’s sleeve, No. 606................................................... do___
7.56
Fray's plain, No. 306..................................................... do—
3.60
.74
Bunghole borers, Enterprise, No. 1...................................do___
Can openers, “ King” ................................................... per gross..
4.50
Coflee mills, Enterprise, No. 1........................................... each..
1.22
Files. Nicholson’s:
Mill and round bastard, 3 to 4 inch...................... per doz..
.40
Mill and round bastard 5-inch.................................... do___
.48
Mill and round bastard, 6-inch................................... do___
.59
Flat bastard, 3 to 4 Inch............................................... do___
.40
Flat bastard, 5-inch....................................................... do___
.48
Flat bastard, 6-inch....................................................... do___
.59
Flat bastard, 7-inch....................................................... do___
.75
Flat bastard, 8-inch....................................................... do___
.88
Flat bastard, 9-inch....................................................... do___
1.01
Dif
fer
ence.
$1.80
4.05
11.48
18.20
2.03
P.ct.
39
39
18
40
18
.75
.68
.76
25
19
17
8. 40
14.50
11.50
11.00
10.50
6.00
.94
6.00
1.35
33]
39
66]
54
39
66]
27
33]
11
.64
.68
.75
.79
.83
.92
1.03
1.13
1.35
60
45
27
98
73
56
37
28
34
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
26
T
able
II .— Shoicing difference between export and home prices o f certain
specified articles— Continued.
Articles and description.
Files. Nicholson’s—Continued.
Flat bastard, 11-inch......................................... ___ per doz..
Flat bastard, 13-inch........................................ ........... do----Square bastard, 3 to 4 inch............................. ........... do___
Square bastard, 5-inch.....................................
Square bastard, 6-inch.....................................
Square bastard, 7-inch..................................... ........... do___
Sauare bastard, 8-inch.....................................
Square bastard, 9-inch......................................
Square bastard, 10-inch....................................
Square bastard, 11-inch....................................
Square bastard, 12-inch....................................
Square bastard, 13-inch...................................
Gauges:
Disston’s combined steel................................. ........... each..
Disston’s center.................................................
Harness snaps:
“ Trojan,” 1* loop............................................
“ Yankee,” IJIoop............................................
“ Derby,” No. 733..............................................
Lamp chimneys:
Macbeth’s No. 502..............................................
Macbeth’s No. 504..............................................
Lawn sprinklers, Enterprise, No. 2 .....................
Levels. Starrett’s 24-inch bench............................
Plumbs and levels, Disston, No. 12.....................
Pocketknife and tool kit, Ulery’s ........................
Kifles:
Stevens’s “ Little Scout,” No. 14...................
Stevens’s “ Maynard Jr.,” No. 14................. ........... do----Stevens’s No. 16................................................
Stevens’s “ Little Krag,” No. 65.................... ........... do___
Stevens’s “ Favorite” ......................................
Sausage stuffers, Enterprise, No. 5 ..................
........... d o ....
Saws:
Disston’s hand, 30-inch, No. 7.............
Disston’s hand, 30-inch, No. 16.........
___ t. .do___
Disston’s combination. No. 43........
........... do___
Disston’s butcher. 24-inch, No. 7 . . .
........... do___
Disston’s framed wood, No. 60. .
........... do___
Disston’s band, 2-inch, 18-gauge.................... -----per foot..
Barnes’s combined scroll and circular
Screws, flat-head iron wood:
Size, 4 inch, Nos. 1 to 4............................
Size, 3 inch, Nos. 1 to 4............
Size, * inch, Nos. 1 to 3 ..............
Size, f inch, No. 4......................
Size, | inch, No. 4........................
Screws, flat-head brass wood:
Size j inch, No. 1 ......................
Size, |inch, No. 0 .................
........... do___
Size, * inch, No. 6....................
........... do___
Size, 1 inch, No. 6......................
Size, t inch, No. 0...............
Screws, round-head iron wood:
Size, * inch, No. 1........................
........... do___
Size, I inch, No. 6........................
Size, 1* inches, No. 10...........
........... do___
Size, 2 inches, No. 16.................
Size, 3 inches, No. 18...........
Screws, round-head brass wood:
Size, 1 inch, No. 1......................
Size, i inch, No. 6..........................
Size, 1* inches, No. 10...............
........... do___
Size, 2 inches, No. 16..................
Size 3 inches, No. 18.....................
........... do___
Screw-drivers, Disston’s electric, 12-inch
Shoe dressing:
Whittemore’s “ Gilt Edge” ..............
Whittemore’s “ Baby Elite” ..........
Shotguns:
Stevens’ No. 105........................................
Stevens’ No. 107.........................................
Stevens’ No. 225.............................................
Sinoked-beef shavers, Enterprise’s No. 23___
........... do___
Squares:
Disston’s trv, rosewood, 10-inch, No. 1.......
Disston’s steel, 4-inch.......................................
Traps, Lovell’s mouse and rat, metallic.............
Trowels, Disston’s brick, S-inch, No. 1................
Vises:
Armstrong’s hinged, No. 1.............................. ........... each..
>er
Bonney’s No. 112................................................ ___ T doz..
Watches:
Elgin movement, 20-vear gold-filled case. . . ........... each..
Elgin movement, silveroid case.....................
Wrenches, Hawkeye “ 5 in 1” ................................ ..per doz___
Dif
Export Home fer
price.
price.
ence.
$1.51
2.11
.40
.48
.59
.75
.88
1.01
1.20
1.51
1.82
2.11
$1.84
2.52
.81
.88
.98
1.09
1.18
1.41
1.58
1.94
2.18
2.67
P.ct.
22
19
102
83
66
45
34
40
25
29
20
27
.55
.17
.62
.19
12
12
2.70
2.90
2.70
3.60
3.98
3.75
33*
37
39
.40
.50
1.76
1.28
5.82
1.15
.68
.82
2.10
1.42
10.08
1.50
70
64
19
11
72
30
1.35
1.80
2.00
2.50
3.47
2.20
1.75
2.20
2.60
3.00
4.50
2.61
30
22
30
20
30
18
13.74
15.39
15.26
8.50
6.00
17.48
19.98
19.42
11.90
9.00
.26
32.00
27
28
27
40
50
€5
14
28.00
.084
.034
.034
.038
.04
.073
.073
.073
.076
.079
SO 072
.
.084
. 064
.096
.108
$0,136
.195
.211
.227
.251
89
132
151
136
132
.034
.06
. 10
.228
.412
.087
.112
.17
.378
.07
87
70
66
63
.072
.16
.336
.768
1.24
1.36
.168
.329
133
106
131
3.646
1.86
194
37
1.20
.60
.67
46
12
2.80
3.00
8.67
4.32
4.25
4.50
9.75
5.55
52
50
12
28
1.66
1.16
5.50
4.07
2.88
1.46
7.33
6.00
72
13
33*
47
1.8*
4.00
JLM
2.84
2.25,
115
115
115
100
97*
122
26
deny to Americans, of whose patriotic self-sacrifice they take
wrongful advantage.
Protection’s favors to foreigners is strongly set forth in Senate
Document No. 54, Sixty-first Congress, first session, prepared
by James G. Parsons, and submitted by me to the Senate, and to
which I refer for the most abounding evidence for the truth of
my contention—that this bill and its immediate predecessors,
the Dingley bill and the McKinley bill, were written under the
color of serving the American laborer, when, in point of fact, it
has done nothing of the kind, but, on the contrary, favors the
foreigner at the expense of the American.
The defense of this indecent practice has been abundantly
answered in Document 54, and I shall not take the time to fur
ther comment upon it.
A similar table, showing that our prices are 50 per cent higher
than world prices, is submitted (Exhibit 12), prepared by Byron
W. Holt, o f New York.
Our great agricultural products have their prices fixed by the
markets o f the world, except where freight prevents.
The price of corn per bushel was 55 cents in 1892 and 53 cents
in 1906, and wheat was 93 cents in 1891 and 82 cents in 1906,
and exported cattle in 1891, $81.25, and $93.17 in 1906 under
improved methods of feeding and transportation, while cotton
was 10 cents in 1890 and 11 cents in 1906.
We have a right to expect cheapening of manufactured prod
ucts because of the constant increasing improvements in ma
chinery— and in this we are disappointed— and a rise in the
price o f agricultural products produced from an area necessarily
limited, and in this we are not gratified.
The prohibitive tariff has increased the cost of living of the work
man and of every other person in the United States, and, therefore,
has diminished the purchasing poiccr o f the xcagcs received.
I have submitted Table No. 202, Abstract of Census, 1907, page
577, which shows that raw commodities have increased since
the Dingley bill went into effect 49.9 per cent, manufacturers’
commodities have increased 32.3 per cent up to 1906, and all
commodities have increased 35.4 per cent up to 1906, and still
higher in 1909.
Mr. President, I now submit Tables 197 and 206, which show
in detail the increase of price o f food products, showing lard
to have increased, since 1896, 3S per cent, corn meal 29 per cent,
fresh pork 41 per cent, salt pork 55 per cent (Statistical Ab
stract of Census, 1907), and similar increases in other things
required by the consumer.
LABOR I S
H ARM ED BY T H E SE H IG H
T R IC E S .
Mr. President, it is obvious that the laboring man who re
ceives a fixed wage, or the laboring woman who receives a
given number o f dollars, whether in the factory, on the farm,
in the mine, in the forest, or in domestic service, by an increase
o f 34 per cent in the price of all articles to be bought with
wages received will be required to pay $134 to buy the same
amount o f goods which cost $100 in 1896 under the Wilson bill.
This means the equivalent of a flat loss o f 25 per cent o f the
narrow wages received by the working people, and shows that
the results o f this tariff have been seriously injurious to the
working people, because o f these artificial prices.
n iG H
P R IC E S IN J U R IO U S TO SA L A R IE D P EO PL E.
Under these high prices it would take, in 1906, $1,354 to buy
as much as $1,000 bought in 1896; in other words, a salaried
man who received a salary of $1,354 in 1896 could save out of
it $354, but to buy the same things in 1906 would take his en
tire salary of $1,354, and leave him nothing saved.
The effect o f these high prices on the salaried man is to
diminish the purchasing power of his salary 25 per cent.
This is the probable reason why Congress raised the salaries
o f Members of Congress and of Senators 50 per cen t; it was to
keep the Senators and Members of Congress from suffering the
injury which the Dingley bill inflicted on the balance o f the
country.
H I G H P R IC E S A R E IN J U R IO U S TO T H E M A N U FA CTU RER S.
High prices on raw material (and one manufacturer’s raw
material is the finished product of another manufacturer) has
the effect o f making it more difficult for American manufac
turers to compete in the markets of the world, because their
first cost on this very account is heavier than would be the
(Senate Document No. 54, Sixty-first Congress, first session.)
case with their foreign competitors.
Our manufacturers do compete, however, on a considerable
It is thus seen that our own manufacturers, to obtain the
protection from foreign competition, not only do nert give Ameri scale, because of the greater efficiency of the American work
can consumers the low prices they are entitled to, but they man and of American invention and improved processes, and
give all the benefit to foreigners. These tables demonstrate because of rebates in foreign material bought and reshipped in
that the pretense o f high tariff to protect themselves against manufactures.
In this way a market is afforded foreign material and denied
the cheap labor o f Europe is false; that our manufacturers can
compete and do compete in the open markets of the world, our own materials unless they compete with foreign material
and that they actually do give to foreigners the benefits they at world prices.
890 3 2 — 8445 '
7.98
3.04
3.60
10.23
4. 47
4.50
28
47
25
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
27
But if the manufacturers could obtain a uniform cost of pronounced the so-called “ trust ” an unlawful combination.
material 35 per cent less than it is now our commerce would be The reason why it was unlawful was because it violated the
greatly multiplied, the activity o f our factories wonderfully common law of the English-speaking people. It violated the
stimulated, all o f America’s laboring elements would be em common law, which holds as void any contract in restraint of
ployed, and the productive energies of the Nation brought to trade. The common law of our States holds a man is entitled
to buy at a price fixed in a free competitive market, and that
the highest degree o f activity and efficiency.
I f lower prices should prevail, tee tcould avoid the evil of any restraint of trade denying the citizen this common-law
right is a fraud upon him. The present tariff laic and the
underconsumption and need have no fear of overproduction.
The percentage of weekly earnings, retail prices, and the proposed lata is conspicuously guilty of this sin, although its
weekly earnings as measured by retail prices is shown by the error has not yet been declared by the courts. A test case should
be brought.
Bureau of Labor bulletin, July, 1905:
Indeed it is a form o f robbery under the color of law and
carried on under the safeguards of organized society; it is a
Weekly
earnings
fraud to impose a prohibitive tax under the pretense of raising
W eekly
as meas
Retail
earnings
revenue, but in reality to protect monopoly. It is a species
per em
prices.
ured by
of immoral conspiracy which ought not to be endured by any
retail
ployee.
prices.
nation of intelligent and liberty-loving men.
The contracts putting the control of the stock of competing
companies in the hands of a “ trustee,” being the first form in
Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
1890.
101.0
102.4
98.6 which organized monopoly became conspicuously bad, has led
1891.
100.8
103.8
97.1 to the term “ trust ” being loosely and incorrectly used to de
1892..
99.4
101.3
101.9
scribe any monopoly.
1893
101.2
104.4
96.9
1894
Second. Another expedient by which monopoly was estab
97.7
99.7
98.0
1895.
98.4
100. C lished was “ a gentleman’s agreement,” by which prices were
97.8
1896.
99.5
95.5
104.2
fixed by verbal agreement and not by contract. This was noth
1897
99.2
96.3
103.0
1898
99.9
98.7
101.2 ing more nor less than a verbal conspiracy, and was no less a
1899
101.2
101.7 fraud and unlawful than if the verbal agreement had been a
99 5
1900..
104.1
103.0
101.1
1901..............
105.9
105.2
100.7 legal contract in writing. The only difference between the two
1902.
109.2
110. 9
98.5 was the greater difficulty of detection of the combination.
1903
112. 3
110.3
101.8
The gentleman’s agreement usually proved inefficient, because
1904..
112.2
111.7
100.4
men engaged in this character of fraud could not trust each
other.
100 equals the standard prices averaged between 1 8 9 0 -1 9 0 0 .
Third. Another form by which the American people have been
It will be observed that even by these tables, coming from defrauded by monopoly is where a giant corporation, like the
sources interested in putting the best face on the matter, the Standard Oil Company, sets a fixed price on crude oil and a
weekly earnings bought no more in 1904 than they did between price on the refined products, and because of its power intimi
1890 and 1900, while they rose in 1896 to 104.2 from 96.9 in dates the independent refiner and compels the refiner through
1S94. showing an increased purchasing power of over 7 per cent fear of destruction, in the crafty ways so fully described by
Ida Tarbell in the history of Standard oil, to recognize and
following the passage of the Wilson— lower tariff—act.
r Mr. President, the tables prepared by Edward Atkinson, of maintain the prices so fixed. In this way the Standard Oil
Boston (Exhibit 2 ), showing the relative number o f persons who Company, through its subsidiary companies, sets the price of
could be affected by a tariff as far as their wages are concerned crude oil in Oklahoma of the best quality at 41 cents a barrel.
in the so-called “ protected or partially protected industries,” No refiner wishes to violate this rule for fear of the Standard,
should not be forgotten. It will be shown by these tables that and no refiner dares to offer to sell refined oil at less than the
10,381,765 persons are farmers, planters, overseers, agricul Standard price for fear of the Standard. It only costs one-half
tural laborers, gardeners, florists, nurserymen, dairy men and cent a gallon to refine petroleum, and crude oil costs 41 cents
women, and other agricultural pursuits; lumbermen and rafts a barrel in Oklahoma. The people ought to get very cheap oil,
men, stock raisers, herders and drovers, turpentine farmers and but they do not get it, because the Standard Oil Company over
laborers, and wood choppers, to which must be added all persons shadows the land and controls the market, both of crude oil and
in professional service, 1,258,739: all persons in domestic and of the refined products.
It is a common practice for the independent refiners to stand
Personal service, 5,580,657; and all persons in trade and trans
portation, 4,766,964 ; making a total o f 21,788,125; and estimating on the prices fixed by the Standard, both on crude and refined,
those who are engaged in other services which could not be for fear that they will be destroyed. The history of the past
regarded as in any degree open to competition, it is found that is strewn with the wreckage of companies who have ventured to
out o f a total o f 29,074,117 there could not be exceeding 600,000 cut the prices o f the Standard Oil Company.
I think the Congress of the United States ought to impose a
Persons occupied in arts which would require a protective duty.
This? table is very carefully drawn and is convincing to a sin rule on interstate corporations using the mails and enjoying public
cere and disinterested student. It therefore appears that very protection that they shall not vary their price to the consumers
little over 2 per cent of the American people are employed in o f the United States, except in so far as the difference in freight
such a way as to really require any measure o f so-called* “ pro justifies. In this way the Standard Oil Company could not put
tection,” while 100 per cent o f our people are taxed about 50 the price of refined below cost locally for the purpose of running
per cent on an average on all dutiable goods, to their very great out an independent competitor in a local field while the Standard
injury, and without even benefiting the 2 per cent who are em at the same time raises the price in another field, with which
ployees, mostly of foreign birth or parentage, in the so-called to make the consumer pay the cost o f this illegitimate warfare
“ protected industries,” while nearly all o f such industries are on a competitor. If the Standard were compelled to give the
owned by monopolies who give their foreign employees the low same price plus freight in all parts of the United States to the
est wages in America and keep millions for themselves.
consumer, the Standard could not in that event afford to lower
its local price for the purpose of killing off a petty competitor.
And I appeal to the leaders of the Republican party in the
This hill ought not to pass, because similar hills heretofore Senate of the United States to bring in an amendment to this
have established, and this bill will continue to maintain, bill providing this remedy.
monopoly, labor's chief oppressor, and will be followed by high
I am sure the chairman of the Committee on Finance will
prices, low wages, greater mortality to labor, increased crime, appreciate the force of this observation, and if he does not
and extravagant and corrupt standards.
afford the country the relief which I invite him to do he at
Mr. President, no man familiar with history of his countrv least shall have no complaint o f me that he did not receive a
will seriously question that when the tariff has its schedules wise and virtuous suggestion from Oklahoma. I assure him
so high as to prevent competition from abroad it must engender that if he will submit the proper amendment he can rely upon
monopoly at home.
the Senators from Oklahoma giving him enthusiastic support
The first step o f triumphant monopoly is to cut off foreign in such a policy.
comj>etition; the next step is easily effected by any o f a variety
I pause to ask the chairman of the Committee on Finance
o f successful expedienta
whether he will bring in or support such an amendment.
First. By the j>olicy o f placing a control of the stock o f com
I appeal to the leaders o f the Republican party in the Senate
peting companies in the hands o f a trustee for the purjiose o f the United States to bring in an amendment to the hill pro
of preventing competition. This was nothing more nor less viding this simple, effective remedy against monopoly. I f we
than a conspiracy in restraint o f trade. The courts in due time I want to establish competition in the United States, if we hope
MONOPOLY.
89032— 8445
28
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
to maintain competition in the United States, we must protect able competition, but merely a just action in restoring the com
the little competitor and not permit him to be killed off by in petition which never should have been interfered with.
genious processes. Otherwise we might as well recognize now
The United States Steel Corporation, I am informed, permits
that monopoly is fixed and is to be dealt with as monopoly. If no organized labor in its service. The thoughtlessness of this
we deal with it as monopoly, then a different process would be monopoly o f its labor, and its forgetfulness o f its moral obliga
available, which I suggest to the Senate of the United States, tion toward poor human beings engaged in its service has been
and that is, conceding monopoly to be established, conceding shown with great force in a recent philanthropic investigation
that we can not control or that we will not control monopoly, conducted under the Russell Sage Foundation in the “ Pittsburg
I suggest that monopoly, having the power o f taxation of the Survey.” What these giant monopolies are capable of doing
American people without limitations, shall be controlled by when not restrained by any other consideration than what is
being limited in the dividends it may pay upon its invested called “ business ” and the pressure for “ dividends,” “ divi
dends,” “ dividends,” is set forth in great detail in the “ Journal
capital, determined by physical valuation.
Fourth. But another and far more dangerous form of monop of Constructive Philanthropy,” published by the “ Charity
oly, skillfully drawn to avoid the decisions of the Supreme Organization Society of the city of New York,” 105 East 22d
Court of the United States with regard to contracts in re street, New York; Robert W. deForest, president; J. P. Morgan,
straint of trade, is the more recent successful plan o f merging treasurer; Edwin T. Devine, general secretary, 105 East 22d
one corporation with another, such as illustrated in the United street, New York City, in “ Charities and the Commons ” in the
States Steel Corporation, by which all competitors' of any im issues o f January, February, and March, 1909.
What a monopoly tariff does for its protected workmen is
portance were absorbed. It was organized in 1901, and at that
time absorbed a number of gigantic concerns, to w it : Federal abundantly set forth in this wonderful report of the unspeak
Steel, National Tube, American Steel and Wire Company, able conditions which have grown up under our system of
National Steel, American Tin Plate, American Steel Hook, government, where the beneficiaries of the tariff have forgotten
American Sheet Steel, American Bridge, Shelby Steel Tube, The manhood, and have forgotten womanhood, and even childhood
Carnegie Company, The Lake Superior Consolidated Iron in their insane pursuit of wealth and power.
Ida M. Tarbell, a critical and learned student o f sociology,
Mines, and acquired interests in numerous other companies,
such as the Pittsburg Steamship Company, The Oliver Iron has described it in a few words in the American Magazine of
Mining Company, The National Steel Company, including The May, 1909:
Sharon Steel Company, The Union Steel Company, The Donora
A T A R IF F -M A D E C IT Y ---- W H A T IT DOES FOR IT S W O R K M E N .
Mining Company, The Republic Coke Company, The River Coal
. TIie °h y of Pittsburg is the greatest monument in this country to
Company, The Sharon Coke Company, The Sharon Ore Com
*ice of
protection. For fifty years it has been the strongpany, The Sharon Sheet Steel Company, and a controlling in noia or the doctrine. For fifty years it has reaped, as no other center
i n rrv!e
States, the benefits of prohibitive duties.
terest in the companies of the Sharon Coal and Limestone Com
in e town lies at the heart of a district in which is produced from
pany and the Sharon Tin Plate Company, and directly and indi one-quarter to one-half of all the various kinds of American iron and
as a goodly
of all
rectly controlling the American Coke Company, The Continen steel, as well products. A llproportion articles our tin, plate glass, and
machine-shop
of these
have for years had the
tal Coke Company, The H. C. Frick Coke Company, The Mc American market practically to themselves. All of these articles have
for years been exported and sold at less prices than the American con
Clure Coke Company, The Southwest Connellsville Coke Com
buy them. All these
have produced enormous
pany and the United Coal and Coke Company, consolidated sumer can bo many, so conspicuous industries that a recognized American
fortunes,
are they,
under the title of H. C. Frick Coke Company, acquiring also type in Europe and the United States is the “ Pittsburg millionaire.”
the Clairton Steel Company in May, 1904, The St. Clair Fur Now, it is certain the tariff produced the Pittsburg millionaire, but
not
was fixed
Congress of
nace Company. This contract carried with it the stock of the that was The what the tariff to protect for by thethe Pittsburg the United
States.
tariff was laid
and help
workman.
Champion Iron Company, The Clairton Land Company, the St. According to the protectionist argument, Pittsburg, as the bulwark and
Clair Terminal Railroad Company, and 51 per cent o f the stock center of protected industries, should produce the happiest, most pros
the United
How
o f the St. Clair Limestone Company; in April, 1905, the Heck perous, and best conditioned workmenC in r i t i e s a n d TStates. m m o n s is it?
There has just been published in
ha
he Co
(now
ler Coke Company was acquired. On April 15, 1907, by lease | T h e S u r v e y ) one o f the most significant pieces o f investigation the
United States Steel obtained the control of the Great Northern country has seen. It is the result of a year or more of work on the
Charities
Railroad Company ore properties through the Great Western ' part of a band of trained investigators commissioned by the the place
Publication committee.
It gives a blueprint of Pittsburg—
Mining Company, a subsidiary company of the United States itself, the people, and their work. W hat does this blueprint show of
I the workingman under protection .
Steel Corporation, and so forth.
It shows
a day
These gigantic mergers o f the various companies, by which I and once in him working t w e l vae hours turn,” for as e v e x days in the week,
two weeks filling
‘ long
or
twenty-four-hour shift.
their competition with each other was effectually destroyed, It is not simply the exceptional man who overworks in this cruel fashi ion. The twelve-hour day is the extreme of an “ altogether incredible
formed the new company, which issued a total of stocks and
Can you
bonds o f about fourteen hundred millions, a large part of i1 amount of overwork by everybody,” so the Survey declares. who lived
make a man by these hours? Is it any wonder that those
which was “ watered,” having no physical value corresponding I and walked among these men preparing this Survey report their s a y in g :
j “ Too tired to read— too tired to think. I work and eat and sleep.”
with the face values o f the stocks and bonds issued.
wonder
women crying
the
In 1907 this gigantic merger company took over the Tennes ; Any cou n try: that ethey report the God-fearing to live so well out for but,
i old
“ W might not have been able
th ere:
see Coal, Iron and Railroad Company, which was itself com | oh, man, we could have brought up the children in the fear o’ God and
posed of various companies merged together in the same fashion ! in a land where men reverence the Sabbath.” Any wonder that those
men who have not
as the United States Steel Corporation, and was its only great I at night in saloons the restraining influence o f a fam ily drown fatigue
|
and brothels?
competitor; under the control of this great merger company are
And what do they earn for their toil? In the tariff-protected indus
various water-supply plants, natural-gas properties, pipe lines, tries, steel and iron, the greatest number receive a wage, says the
i report, “
to be inadequate to the
ore docks, a multitude of iron mines, and some 25 railroad j American so low as of living— wages adjusted maintenance of a normal
standard
to the single man in the
companies.
i lodging house, not to the responsible head of a fam ily.
And this in
! industries where “ to protect the workingman ” this country has for
By these gigantic mergers competition is effectually con j years taxed itself millions upon millions of dollars. The estimated
trolled under the forms of law, and the resulting giant corpora tariff profit in the steel trust alone in 1907 was $ 8 0 ,0 00,000. Who got
tion has such a dominating and masterful position that smaller ! the money? Go look at the steel palaces and chateaux in New York
fill
corporations dare not compete or cut the price or attempt to j and Paris. Go ask the Pittsburg millionaires who this the glittering
places of pleasure in the great cities o f Europe and
country, who
do so. Competition is thus utterly destroyed.
figure in divorce and murder trials, who are writing their names on
Moody's manual for 1907, page 2320, gives over 1,000 com foundations and bequests and” institutions. live? W hat kind of house
IIow does this “ protected
workingman
panies absorbed or merged, by or into other companies for 1907. holds are these “ builded on steel ?” The reporter o f the situation
summarizes th e m : “ E v i l c o n d i t i o n s t c e r e f o u n d t o e x i s t in e v e r y s e c
The smaller corporations engaged in the same business are
on
t
y.
O
t
ni
e en t va l
r
e
s
y
indeed o f some use to the giant monopoly, because the smaller ftlio u t e o f o nh es csietn s e o f v e r c e h e y .o m E y p r e s r o o k e r iu s t sp e g c a c dl eosn tphrei vh i l lsshi e d s
d
e’
de
nc
ri
e
r he
d es
corporation being in existence and doing business at the same w e r e s w a r m i n g w i t h m e n , w o m e n , a n d c h i l d r e n — e n t i r e f a m i l i e s l i v i n g
prices fixed by the larger corporation, the greater concern can i n o n e r o o m a n d a c c o m m o d a t i n g h o a r d e r s in a c o m e r t h e r e o f . C e ll a r
o
ere
a id
p
of o
er f
i s
a
ou e
er
point to the smaller concern as evidence to the common people r oa sm s wu x u rtyh e t o b b e i n g t a l a c e s o n l y t hh r o uagm i lmeu .c h Ienf f om t noyf h o i ls nsg w taetp s
w
a l
,
ob
in e d
t
h
r
t
i
s
that there is active competition in the field. The common people a n d s t r a i n i n g m u s c l e s . C o u r t s a n d a l l e y s f o u l e d b y b a d d r a i n a g e a n d
may accept the testimony, but it will be a Barmecide Feast p i l e s o f r u b b i s h w e r e p l a y i n g g r o u n d s f o r r i c k e t y , p a l e -f a c e d , g r i m y
ch ild r en .
A n e n v e lo p in g c lo u d o f s m o k e a n d d u s t, th r o u g h w h ic h lig h t
when they test the prices.
a n d a i r m u s t f i l t e r , m a d e h o u s e k e e p i n g a t r a v e s t y in m a n y n e i g h b o r
When the people threaten to remove the monopoly tariff, h o o d s ; a n d e v e r y p h a s e o f t h e s i t u a t i o n w a s i n t e n s i f i e d b y t h e e v i l o f
which shelters monopoly, all of the agents o f monopoly join in | o v e r c r o w d i n g — o f h o u s e s u p o n l o t s , o f f a m i l i e s i n t o h o u s e s , o f p e o p l e
o r o o m ."
one mighty chorus in defense o f the poor little independent man i n tAmong sthe worst illustrations o f these t y p i c a l conditions are certain
who will be utterly ruined if the tariff is lowered a particle. properties owned by the very corporations who are reaping wealth from
But the smaller concern is used as a highwayman might hold the tariff-protected products. These beneficiaries of the generosity of
American people, these gentlemen
when they
up a child to ward off a merited chastisement. It is, however, the their interest threatened, hold up who, laborer andsee the taxation
in
the
his good as a
no chastisement and no injustice whatever to the monopoly to reason for continuing it. what do t h e y say when these conditions are
pointed out to th e m ; “ W e d o n ’ t w a n t t o g o i n t o t h e h o u s i n g b u s i n e s s .
take down the tariff wall that shelters monopoly from reason89032—8445
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
29
W e are manufacturers, not real estate dealers. W e m ay be forced to
build houses in certain new districts in order to attract and hold labor,
but in an old, settled community let the laboring man take care of
himself.
W e don’ t believe in paternalism.”
They have had no more interest in preserving the lives of the men
who do the terrible toil necessary to their wealth than in giving them
decent housing. For years the death rate from typhoid fever in Pitts
burg has been the highest of any city in the civilized world. Everybody
knew it.
Everybody knew why. There was no supply of pure drinking
water. A filtration plant was needed. Did any Pittsburg millionaire
offer to build it— insist that the industries which called the vast army
of labor to Pittsburg should build it? N o ; they left a corrupted city
government to fight over the appropriations for the work and scattered
in endowments and in institutions in other cities and other States many
times the five millions needed in Pittsburg to save the lives of- the
workmen. They hold up to the world for admiration their love of
great material problems— they argue with the American people that
their skill in solving these problems is a good and sufficient reason for
continuing general taxation in their favor. But a problem which,
worked out, would benefit nobody but the humble two-dollar-a-day man
who sweats out his life in the heat of their profitable furnaces does not
interest them. It might savor of paternalism !
Not even the child has touched them. The conditions under which
the children of the poor are brought up in Pittsburg are such that
babies die like flies. Of those along the river, a settlement worker told
Samuel Hopkins Adams, when he was working on health conditions for
the Survey : “ N ot one child in ten comes to us from the river-bottom
section without a blood or skin disease, usually of long standing. Not
one out of ten comes to us physically up to the normal for his' or her
age.
W orse than that, feio of them arc up to the mental standard, and
an increasing percentage are imbecile.”
As to the schools, here is what an authority s a y s : “ The school
buildings are in many cases crowded, dark, dirty, often of three stories,
and bad fire risks.
The condition of the children in these schools, good
and bad, rich and poor, may be known by the large proportion having
defective teeth, reduced hearing, imperfect vision. A n excessively large
number of them are mouth breathers, partially so because they are
unable to breathe through their noses in the sm oky air of Pittsburg,
and a v ery considerable number are below the stature and the weight
determined for the average child. In a large percentage the defects of
teeth, nose, and throat bring them, below the physical normal.
These
are the children that ivear out in childhood.”
Is it a wonder that this gentleman suggested:
“ Ought not the Pittsburg schools to be closed and the children
repairedt”
This Pittsburg Survey is the most awful arraignment of an American
institution and its resulting class pronounced since the days of slavery.
It puts upon the Pittsburg millionaire the awful stamp of greed, of
stupidity, and of heartless pride. But what should we expect of him?
He is the creature of a special privilege which for years he has not
needed. He has fought for it because he fattened on it. He must
have it for labor. But look at him and look at his laborer and believe
him if you can.
Justice takes a terrible revenge on those who thrive by privilege.
She blinds their eyes until they no longer see human misery.
She dulls
their hearts until they no longer beat with humanity.
She benumbs
their senses until they respond only to the narrow 'horizon of what
they can individually possess, touch, feel.
She makes, as she has in
Pittsburg, a generation of men and women who day by day can pass
hundreds of tumbled-down and filthy homes, in which the men and
women who make their wealth live, and feel no sh ock ; who can know
that deadly fevers and diseases which are preventable are wiping out
hundreds of those who do their tasks, and raise no hand. Little chil
dren may die or grow up stunted and evil within their sight and no
penny of their wealth, no hour of their leisure, is given them.
Women
may pass hours of incessant toil and die, broken and unhonored, within
their sight, and they raise no hand.
W ealth which comes by privilege
kills. The curse of Justice on those who will not recognize injustice
is the sodden mind, the dulled vision, the unfeeling heart.
I. M. T.
Some one might say that Ida Tarbell’s picture is too graphic.
I do not think it possible to convey in two pages the terrific
arraignment o f our civilization which is exhibited in the Pitts
burg Survey.
But I submit another authority, whose calm and disinterested
judgment and statement of the facts ought to command the
attention of the entire nation.
I was interested after reading this distressing record of the
misery and degradation o f the employees in protected industries
at Pittsburg, and their great poverty, to observe, in striking con
trast, that Mr. H. C. Frick, one o f the masters o f the iron, steel,
and coke monopoly, was reported by the public press as trying
to buy an oil painting by Holbein from the Duke of Norfolk for
$ 350, 000.
I could not help thinking how scandalous it was to
take the labor o f these poor people and dissipate it in such folly.
The papers announce also that Mr. Schwab, another steel mag
nate, was successfully “ bucking the tiger ” at Monte Carlo, and
Rambling on a gigantic scale. No doubt he has millions which
he may hazard at the gambling table and not feel the loss, but
where does he get it? He gets it out of the grimy sweat of a
labor so poorly paid that the women and children must, of
necessity, suffer degradation and physical, social, and spiritual
degeneration.
, The morning papers state that a New York lady now suing
ner husband for divorce has spent in the last ten years $ 770,000
in various interesting and fanciful extravagances, paying from
•>".00 to $800 for dresses, having scores of servants to dance at
tendance and promote the wildest vagaries o f fashion. One can
not pick up a paper without reading the unseemly and indecent
waste of the national resources by those beneficiaries who profit
by monopolies sheltered under a noncompetitive tariff, one
which prevents all competition, and gives them the power to
combine at home for the purpose o f fleecing the American jieople and picking their pockets wholesale by prices which are 50
per cent higher than the prices in the markets o f the world.
Side by side are babies dying like flies for want of proper food
and air and decent environment. The omnipotent God will
surely punish a nation or a party that sees these evils with
callous heart and offers no remedy.
The details o f this tragic condition is found in the January,
February, and March numbers of Charities and Commons, 1909,
published in New York.
Mr. President, I have not the slightest doubt that the great
and powerful city o f Pittsburg, supplied as it is with some of the
best brains and best men in the world, will correct, or at least
abate, in some degree these conditions. I have no doubt that
public sentiment throughout the United States will so influence
our great commercial monopolies that they themselves will be
led to a more considerate treatment o f their laborers and cease
to regard them as machines of iron or wood, to be worn-out in
production and renewed by others. I have the confidence in the
patriotism and good sense of the leaders of both of the great
parties of our country to believe that they will not endure the
prolonged continuance o f these conditions.
89032— 8445
R E SU L T S OP P IT T SB U R G SURVEY.
Prof. Edward T. Devine, of New York City, general secretary
of the Charity Organization Society of the City of New York
(see Vol. Ill, Amer. Sociological Soc., May 1, 1909), gives a
sketch of the results o f the Pittsburg Survey, describing what
was found to be the actual fact at this great center of the pro
tective industries. He says they found the following results:
I. An altogether incredible amount of overwork by everybody, reach
ing its extreme in the twelve-hour shift for seven days in the week
in the steel mills and the railway switch yards.
II. Low wages for the great m ajority of the laborers employed by
the m ills ; not lower than in other large cities, but low compared with
the prices— so low as to be inadequate to the maintenance o f a normal
American standard of livin g; wages adjusted to the single man, not to
the responsible head of a family.
III. Still lower icages for women, who receive, for example, in one
of the metal trades in which the proportion of women is great enough
to be menacing, one-half as much as unorganized men in the same shops
and one-third as much as the men in the union.
IV . A n absentee capitalism, with bad effects strikingly analogous to
those of absentee landlordism, of which also Pittsburg furnishes note
worthy examples.
V. A continuous inflow of immigrants w ith low standards attracted
by a wage which is high by the standards of southeastern Europe, and
which yields a net pecuniary advantage because of abnormally low
expenditures for food and shelter, an inadequate provision for sickness,
accident, and death.
VI. The destruction o f family life, not in any imaginary or mystical
sense, but by the demands of the day’s work, and by the very demon
strable and material method of typhoid fever and industrial accidents,
both preventable, but costing last year in Pittsburg considerably more
than a thousand lives, and irretrievably shattering many homes.
V II. Archaic social institutions such as the aldermanic court, the"
ward school district, the fam ily garbage disposal, and the unregenerate
charitable institution, still surviving after the conditions to which they
were adapted have disappeared.
V III. The contrast— which does not become blurred by fam iliarity
with details, but on the contrary becomes more vivid as the outlines
are filled in— the contrast between the prosperity on the one hand of
the most prosperous of all the communities of our western civilization,
with its vast natural resources, the generous fostering of government,
the human energy, the technical development, the gigantic tonnage of
the mines and mills, the enormous capital of which the bank balances
afford an indication, and, on the other hand, the neglect of life, of
health, of physical vigor, even of the industrial efficiency of the indi
vidual. Certainly no community before in America or Europe has ever
had such a surplus, and never before has a great com munity applied
what it had so mcagcrly to the rational purposes of human life. Not
by gifts of libraries," galleries, technical schools, and parks, but by the
cessation of toil one day in seven, and sixteen hours in the tw enty-four,
by the increase of wages, by the sparing of lives, by the prevention of
accidents, and by raising the standards of domestic life, should the
surplus come back to the people of the com munity in which it is
created.
T II E P R O F IT S OF M O N OPO LY.
The Senator from Towa gave us a graphic description of the
unreasonable profits o f the United States Steel upon its watered
stock. Its net earnings after paying interest on bonds of sub
sidiary companies and the accounts o f miscellaneous expendi
tures and charges amounted to one hundred and fifty-six mil
lions. Its products for 1906 amounted to 13.511.149 tons of in
gots. out of which was produced 10,578,433 tons of finished
products.
Its assets for 1906 are stated (Moody’s Manual, p. 2282) at
$1.681,309,769; its net profits for dividends 190G were $98,219,088, exceeding $9 a ton on 10,578,433 tons of product, not count
ing profits to subordinate corporations.
Its profit on the finished product has exceeded $9 a ton,
collected from the consumers of the United States under a
tariff which prohibits the consumer buying elsewhere, and thus
30
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
enables this gigantic corporation and its independent allies to
exercise a complete monopoly of all onr people.
The proposed schedule in this bill of 31.65 per cent average
tariff upon all metal and all manufactures of metal operates not
for the benefit of labor, but to establish monopolies which con
trol labor, eompel it to disorganize, imposes cruelty and extraor
dinary conditions upon labor, and, together with other monopo
lies, established in like manner, pick the pockets of the labor
ing men and o f all other men from the Atlantic to the Pacific by
artificial prices, which the retailer and jobber is compelled by
penalties to observe, so that the wages received by labor is
craftily and fraudulently taken out of his pockets by these
stealthy organizations, whose lobbyists now infest this capital
and falsely advise Senators and Members with regard to their
duty in the premises.
Side by side with these abnormal developments will be found
hundreds of thousands of honest companies, working at reason
able profits, engaging in legitimate competition, content with the
ancient maxim o f—
k a il s .
Per ton.
United States__________________________________________________________ $ 4 7 .1 3
United States duty___________________________________________________
11. 20
United States price, less duty_______________________________
35. 93
G erm any-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------33. 60
France------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34. 60
Belgium---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------33. 00
United States production, wire nails, 1906, 5 1 2 ,8 0 0 to n s ; United
States duty. $ 1 1.20 per to n ; tax on consumer, $ 5 ,7 4 3 ,3 6 0 ; government
revenue, 1907. $91 : cost to the people for each dollar collected by the
Government, $63,114.85.
r£ su m
£.
United States
revenue.
Live and let live,
S O 135,181.00
C,
Sugar........
People pay
additional.
570.641.821.00
Cost to
the peo
ple for
each SI
tax col
lected by
the Gov
ernment.
$2.17
and who are also victimized by the exactions of monopoly in- P i g iron___
7L23
1,406, S25.00 103.125.444.00
Steel billets, e tc ..
267.05
590, C63.00 157.235.474.00
greater or less degree as the case may be.
Steel rails . . .
943.91
30,670.00
28,919,129.00
The prices which are lowered in the United States by legiti Nails, w ire___
5,743,360.00 63,114.85
91.00
mate competition are so far offset by the unreasonable high
prices o f monopoly that the general average has gone far above
Census Bulletin 57, 1905, points out the confessed profits on
the markets of the world, as I have heretofore shown.
Mr. President, several Senators have shown on the floor the various manufacturing enterprises, a few of which I give.
CEN SU S P R O FIT S OK W OOL SIA X U F A C T U E IX G , C L O T H IN G , AND T IL E .
enormous profits made by various monopolies.
The authoritative record can be found in Moody's Manual of
Census Bulletin No. 57, 1905. gives the following statistics on
1907, a volume of twenty-five hundred pages, giving the accounts woolen and worsted goods and clothing manufactures, and so
o f the corporations doing business in the country, but not by any forth, from which the profit can be calculated:
means all of the monopolies. In these tables will be found the Number of establishments___________________________
8 , 873
enormous profits which have been advertised to the public stat E xp en ses:
Salaries paid 28,454 officials and clerks_______________ $3 0 , 015, 521
ing what they have made. The record does not tell the entire
" ages paid 394,893 workmen___________________________ 163, 503, 042
story by any means, but it tells enough. The manner in which
Miscellaneous expenses____________________________________ 98, 564, 867
the people of the United States are unjustly taxed by these
Cost of materials__________
_____
_________________ 5 1 4 , 002, 738
artificial high prices in the interest of monopoly is shown by
Total expenses----------------------------------------------------------------- 806, 086, 168
sugar.
Value of product------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 1 1 ,3 9 9 ,8 4 1
Our record shows that the people o f the United States con
105, 313, 6 73
Profit------sume 2,993,979 tons o f sugar per annum. The London price is
529, 892, 740
a
2 cents a pound less than the New York price, so that the people C a ppit r ol--------------- 20 per cent.
A p
x im a te ly
pay about $40 a ton for sugar in excess o f the London price—
M E N ’ S CL O TH IN G .
approximately one hundred and thirty millions of dollars— Number of establishments------------------------------------------4, 504
while the duty collected is only sixty millions, leaving a profit Exnenses *
Salaries paid 13,210 officials and clerks-------------------------- $ 1 3 , 7 0 3 ,1 6 2
o f seventy millions to the monopolies and interests protected by
W ages paid 137.190 workmen-----------------------------------------5 7 , 225, 5 0 0
the tariff, amounting in this one item to about $5 per annum for
Men over 16------------------------------------------------58, 769
every family in the United States.
Women over 1 6 -----------------------------------------75, 468
Children under 1 6 -------------------------------------2, 963
In similar manner will be shown the profits to the trusts on
Miscellaneous expenses------------------------------------------------------57, 695, 240
pig iron, on steel billets, on steel rails, as compiled by the
M a t e r i a ls ___________________________________________________ 185, 793, 4 36
Actuary of the Treasury. ( S. Doc. 45, 61st Cong., 1st sess.)
Total expenses----------------------------------------------------------------- 314, 417, 344
Value of product--------------------------------------------------------------------------355, 796, 571
p ig ir o n .
Per ton.
United States------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ $ 1 7 , 7 5
4 ! 00
United States duty____________________________________________ 2 1 1 ___
United States price, less duty______________________________
13. 75
G e rm an y----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2_____
1 1 .2 1
F ran ce----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2~___
11 25
B elgium ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~_____
l l ' 75
E ngland---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11. 0<>
United States production of pig iron. 1007, 25,781.361 to n s ; dutv
$4 per t o n ; tax on consumer, $ 1 0 3,125,444 ; government revenue, 1 0 0 7 '
$ 1 ,4 6 6 ,8 2 5 .
'
B IL L E T S , s t e e l .
Per ton.
United States----------------------------------------------------------------_
_
__
71
United States duty---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2H_I
7^
C a p it a l_________________________________________________
About 27 per cent.
W O M E N ’ S C L O T H IN G .
3, 351
i Number establishments---------------------- -------------------------$9,
! Salaries paid 10,920 officials and clerks-----------------51,
j W ages paid 115,705 workmen------------------------------------j ?»Ien over 1 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------- 42, 614
i Women over 1 6 ------------------------------------------------------------- 7 2 ,2 4 2
849
I Children under 1 6--------------------------------------------------------24,
! Miscellaneous expenses------------------------------------------------130,
M a te r ia ls _______________________________________________
United States value, less duty.
G erm an y-------------------------------------------------F rance___________________________________
Belgium _________________________________
E ngland----------------------------------------------------
Value
17. 90
14. 88
15 . 00
15. 5 0
15. 14
United States production. 1906, 23,3 9 8 ,1 3 6 t o n s ; duty, $ 6 .72 per
to n : tax on consumers. $ 1 5 7 ,2 3 5 ,4 7 4 j government xrvemie, 19ot>,
IiA IL S j ST E E L .
17 57
B R IC K
I
Value
France-7 .-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
Belguun-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 99 j
18. 59 1
Average of above— Europe____________________________________
United States price____________________________________________________
18. 14
25. 41
Difference_______________________________________________________
7. 27
United States production of steel rails, 1907, 3,977 ,8 7 2 to n s ; differ
ence in price, home and abroad. $ 7 .2 7 ; tax on consumer, $ 2 8 ,9 1 9 ,1 2 9 ;
government revenue, 1907, $30,670.
89032— 8445
349, 2 82
719, 9 96
3 1 ,4 3 6 ,1 4 5
73, 947, 8 23
AN D T IL E .
Number of establishments------------------------------------------- 4 ,6 3 4
Salaries paid 3,690 officials and clerks---------------------------------Wages paid 06.021 workmen__________________________________
Miscellaneous expenses_________________________________________
Cost of m aterials------------------------------------------------------------------------
t o il
975, 944
180, 193
216, 225, 4 15
247, 661, 560
Total expenses---------product-----------------------
P r o f i t --------------------------C a p it a l------------------------------------About 42 per cent.
United States-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------$25 41
United States duty-------------------------------------------------------------------------------7 $4
United States price, less duty______________________________
41, 379, 227
153, 177, 5 0 0
$3,
28,
6,
16,
530, 474
646, 005
{>69,161
316, 4 99
T otal expense-------------------------------------------------------------------5 5 , 462, 139
product___________________________________________________ 71, 152, 0 6 2
P r o f i t ____________________________________________________
About 22 per cent.
15, 689 , 9 23
The profits o f men’s clothing amounts to 27 per cent, on
women’s clothing 42 per cent, and yet side by side with this
manufacturer’s profit the sweating system is in full force tan
interesting account o f which will l>e found in II. R. Report 2309,
52d Congress, 2d session), with ruinous conditions under which
| oppressed labor earns its miserable bread; industrious young
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
31
exhibit a very great mortality as compared with other people,
and develop tuberculosis and other diseases.
The C ongressional R ecord o f June 4, 1909, gives a table of
some of the profits of the cotton mills of the country, submitted
b y Senator S m it h o f South Carolina. I ask that it be printed
in the R ecord.
■women, twelve hours a day in the shops of unremitting industry,
and increasing speed, earning $4, $5, and $6 a week. For a $10
suit So cents is paid for the making of a coat, 25 to 35 cents
for the pants, and 20 to 25 cents for the vest; for a $15 suit
$1.50 is paid for making the coat, and so on. It is no wonder,
of course, people living in abject wretchedness o f the sweatshops
Statistics relative to cotton-mill stocks as investments.
Date of
incor
pora
tion.
Name of company.
Am oskeag_______________________ . ___________
Androscoggin.......................... ......................................
Bates
Border City....................................................................
Richard Borden____
_________________ ____
King Philip______________________________________
Dartmouth......................................................................
Dwight_______________________________ ________
Great Falls......................................................................
Laurel L a k e ............................... .............. ..............
Massachusetts Cotton................................. .............
Lawrence....................................................................
Pacific_______________ ____________________
Pepiiercll........................
Sagamoro____________ _________ __ ____________
Troy.....................................
Union _ _______________
Whitman........................................................................
1831
1SS0
1852
1830
1871
1871
1805
1811
1823
1881
1839
1S31
1853
1899
1879
1811
1879
1895
Capital.
Surplus.
$5,700,000.00 $3,720,691.00
1,000,000.00
1,123,861.00
1,200,000.00
1,376,361.00
1,000,000.00
333,598.00
1,000,000.00
502,171.00
1,500,000.00
S51.765.00
600,000.00
685,105.00
1,200,000.00
1,299,219.00
1,500,000.00
950,000.00
600,000.00
181,251.00
1,131,690.00
1,800,000.00
737,000.00
1,250,000.00
6.332.851.00
3.000.
000.00
2.556.000. 00 1.628.187.00
355,693.00
900,000.00
471,291.00
300,000.00
581,OH.00
1,200,000.00
1,500,000.00
945,411.00
0 In addition to which a 25 per cent dividend was paid.
For eight years average annual dividends for group, 15.65 per cent.
Debt.
$1,425,000.00
16,559.00
117,565.00
500,000.00
511.00
150,131.00
470,529.00
735,740.00
338,603.00
None.
2,160,763.00
500,000.00
None.
117,910.00
607,899.00
2,816.00
None.
474,215.00
Earn
ings
petshare,
1907.
Capi
Average Book
Total
Divi dividends dividends surplus taliza
tion
dends,
per
for eight
per
1907. for eight years.
share.
years.
spindle.
Par
value.
$21.30
21.91
41.87
37.50
32.62
25.65
82.50
103.91
21.33
28.24
41.30
2.5.27
550.00
$16.00
10.00
35.00
23.50
20.00
6.00
66.00
12.00
12.00
14.00
5.00
8.00
320.00
12 00
30.00
67.00
35.50
8.00
Per cent. Per cent.
$64.59
126
15.75
112.38
9.37
75
114.61
130
16.25
119
14.87
33.35
12.62
50.21
<*101
1C
8J
21.25
56.78
114.13
19.75
15S
108.25
12.50
100
14.62
64.00
117
37.08
23.75
6190J
6.25
79.53
50
62.96
122
15.25
15.50 2,110.95
124
158
19.75
63.71
39.52
85
10.63
23.62
791.90
189
183
22.87
48.67
63.02
58J
7.25
$100.00
loo.oo
100.00
100.00
100. o
c
100.(X
100.00
500.00
100.00
100.0
100.00
100.00
1,000.00
100.0
100.00
500.0
100.0
100.00
48.53
335.00
46.00
29.76
$10.76
13.93
14.61
12.51
10.37
11.10
5.00
5.45
11.36
10.03
14.13
12.50
10.27
9.80
6.31
10.89
11.35
6 In addition to which a 100 per cent dividend was paid.
The merger in the capital o f earnings is not shown, nor in ! inequality still greater. The rich will be growing richer; the poor at
relatively poorer. It seems to me,
altogether from the
plant improvements out o f earnings, which would make the least of the laborers interest, that theseapart not conditions whichques
tion
are
fur
earnings still larger. W. Irving Bullard, of Danielson, Conn., nish a solid basis for a progressive social s ta te ; but, having regard to
a great cotton manufacturer, is quoted as saying at Boston that interest. I think the considerations adduced show that the first
and_ indispensable step toward any serious amendment of the laborer’s
April 36, 1908:
lot is that he should be, in one way or another, lifted out of the groove
in which he at present works and placed in a position compatible with
his becoming a sharer in equal proportion with others in the general
advantages arising from industrial progress.
A summary of 100 cotton mills in Oldham district, in England, shows
the following remarkable fa c ts : Capital invested, $ 3 0 ,5 0 1 ,2 3 0 ; net earn
ings, $0,005,785 ; average earning per mill, $ 0 0 ,0 5 5 ; dividend, 155 per
cent.
The average dividend disbursements for these 100 mills was 15| per
cent, while the net earnings show an average of 354 per cent.
The indecent treatment of helpless labor by organized capital
is not confined to America, but we ought to lead the world in
the conservation of human life and unrewarded toil by laws
wisely and humahely drawn.
The recent giant monopolies, engendered and sheltered by the
prohibitive tariff, are responsible for the unrest of the country.
The American Tobacco Company, which has become suffi
ciently powerful to fix the price o f all tobacco raised in the
United States, advertises its assets for 1906 at $278,628,564.
By merger and otherwise it controls the American Cigar Com
pany. American Stogie Company, the Havana Tobacco Company,
with various subcompanies, the American Snuff Company, the
Lori 1
bird Company, and so forth. The impatience and violence of
the tobacco raisers in Kentucky and Tennessee, known as
the “ Night Riders,” is due directly to the tyranny of this com
pany, which, being strong enough to control prices, is enabled
to exercise its will on the tobacco growers, who have been mak
ing a blind effort to protect themselves by force. In like man
ner the crushing effect o f extreme poverty, due to the processes
which I have described, is leading to actual crime in many ways
nnd is responsible for the growth of radical socialism and an
archism throughout the world.
D IST R IB U T IO N
OF
W EALTH.
In “ The Social Unrest,” John Graham Brooks, on page 161,
Quoting Thorold Rogers (Oxford Economy), says:
Spalirs’s table for the distribution of wealth in the United
States, taken from his work, “ The Present Distribution of
Wealth in the United States,” when our national wealth was
$60,000,000, is as follow s:
Class.
Families.
Per
cent.
Average
wealth.
Aggregate
wealth.
Rich............................................
M iddle.......................................
Poor............................................
Very poor.................................
125,000
1,362,500
4,762,500
6,250,000
1.0
10.9
38.1
50.0
$263,010
14,180
1,639
$32,880,000,000
19,320,000,000
7,800,000,000
54.8
32.2
13.0
T otal...............................
13,500,000
100.0
4,800
60,000,000,000
100.0
,
!
Per
cent.
The inequalities have been steadily growing worse, and when
a single person’s fortune is estimated at a thousand millions
and is gathering in $50,000,000 per annum of the net proceeds
of the products o f the labor o f this country, while millions of
human beings can not lay aside $50 apiece per annum, wT
hat
must be the inevitable result? It is this condition, half under
stood, that is developing rapidly a sentiment o f radical social
ism. discontent, and social unrest.
Moody’s Manual of 1907, page 30, presents a “ General Sum
m ary” o f corporations offering stocks and bonds for sale to
the stock exchanges and recorded by him in great detail in a
volume of nearly 3,000 pages, as follow s:
In a vague way they (the laborers) are uuder the impression that Steam railroad division
the greater part of the misery which they see is the direct product of i Public utilities division.
the laws enacted and maintained in the interest of particular classes. I Industrial division--------Mining d iv ision ________
And on the whole they are in the right.
T otal stocks and bonds.
------- $ 1 5 ,4 3 6 ,7 5 8 ,0 0 0
------8, 130, 404, 000
-------- 10, 150, 333, 000
------2, 525, 173, 000
Quoting Professor Smart, o f Glasgow:
Page 10, Report (1 9 0 7 ) Comptroller of the Currency,
But when machinery is replacing man and doing the heavy work of
resources national hanks________________________________
8, 390, 328 40 2
industry, it is time to get rid of that ancient prejudice that men must
Page 35, Report (1 9 0 7 ) Comptroller of the Currency,
work ten hours a day to keep the world up to the level of the comfort !
resources other banks and trust companies__________
1 1 ,1 6 8 , 511, 516
it has attained. Possibly, If we clear our minds o f cant, we may see i
the reason why we still wish the laborer to work ten hours a day is
In addition to this enormous volume of corporate wealth,
that we, the comfortable classes, may go on receiving the lion's share !
which comprises a registered one-third of our national wealth]
of the wealth these machines, iron and human, are turning out.
So Professor Cairnes. an economist noted for ability and cau
tion, in his “ Lending Principles” (ibid., 362), says:
Unequal as is the distribution of wealth already in the country, the
tendency o f industrial progress— on the supposition that the present
separation between industrial classes is maintained— is toward an
8 9 0 3 2 — 8445
there is an unregistered volume of corporations which are close
corporations which do not sell stock, which are personal cor
porations, amounting to thousands of millions o f dollars.
I respectfully call your attention to the Statistical Abstract
o f 1907, Table 244, which sets forth the wealth of the United
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
32
States, which shows clearly where its approximate ownership
may be found, to w it:
Table 2U, Statistical Abstract, 1807.
Total wealth in United States__________________________ ' $ 1 0 7 ,1 0 4 , 211, 917
Real property_____________________________________________
62, 341, 4 9 2 ,1 3 4
Live stock_________________________________________________
4, 073, 791, 736
Farm implements and machinery______________________
844, 989, 863
Manufacturing machinery, tools, etc___________________
3, 297, 7 5 4 ,1 8 0
1 1 ,2 4 4 ,7 5 2 ,0 0 0
Railroad equipment______________________________________
Street railway, shipping, waterworks__________________
4, 840, 546, 909
Agricultural products___________________________________
1, 899, 379, 652
Manufactured products__________________________________
7, 409, 291, 668
495, 543, 68o
Imported m erchandise__________________________________
Mining p ro d u cts________________________________________
326, 851, 517
Clothing and personal ornaments______________________
2, 000, 000, 000
Furniture, carriages_____________________________________
5, 750, 000, 000
Total for United States_________________________
1 0 7 ,1 0 4 , 211, 917
Where do the city laborers under protection come in as joint
heirs of modern prosperity?
What part of this wealth created by labor is theirs?
They have no real estate, no live stock, farm macu.aery,
manufacturing machinery, railroads, or under any visible classi
fication. The only thing that they can have under this tabula
tion is clothing and a little personal property.
And yet the products of the labor in our specified manufactur
ing industries of 1905 reached a total of $14,802,147,087, for
5,470,321 wage-earners, whose product was therefore worth
$2,708 per capita.
These people received $2,611,540,532 in wages (Stat. Abst.
U. S., 1907, p. 144), or $479 per capita.
This $479 each must feed and shelter and clothe and educate
and provide leisure and the joyous participation !n the common
providences of God for an average of three people, on about $160
each per annum, or about an average of $13.33 per month.
There can hardly be much margin of saving under the circum
stances for sickness, ill health, accident, or loss of employment.
In New York City, with over four millions o f people, less than
1 in 40 has any real estate.
L E S S T H A N 100,000 O W N C IT Y .
[From the New York Tim es.]
Lawson Purdy, president of the board of taxes and assessments, in a
speech at the City Planning Municipal A rt Exhibition, said that the
value of the taxable property in New York City is nnv estimated to
be about $ 6 ,8 0 0,000,000. Two-thirds, or 67 per cent, .f this property,
he added, is land. Mr. Purdy said that it is estim ate! that less than
100,000 persons own every particle of the land.
Our wealth increases over $4,500,000,000 every year over and
above our expenses. What proportion does labor, the creator of
wealth, retain net out o f its own creation?
A beggarly part, Mr. President. Our national policy can be
improved; our national policy should be changed.
W e ought not to persist in a policy artfully designed to make
the rich richer and the poor poorer.
F A L SE STAND ARDS OF L IF E .
Piling up enormous wealth in few hands is setting false stand
ards of life and making classes whose sympathies are very far
apart.
One can not help but be struck with the enormous cost of
hotel services, for example, in the New York hotels conducted
expressly for the patronage o f the rich ; $15 to $20 a day for a
bedroom, sitting room, and bath is nothing unusual; $15 for a
dinner for two persons is not regarded as extravagant; and
side by side with this will be found families who can not save
$30 net out of their labor of a year’s time.
This may seem unimportant; I regard it as a matter o f very
great importance, illustrating the grossly unequal distribution
o f the proceeds of human labor; a condition which pampers one
class and starves another; a condition which ouglt not to be en
couraged by a nation which desires to preserve its liberties.
T IP P IN G .
The whole tipping system which in sections where these differ
ences o f wealth are most pronounced is an ev dence offering
11: .T*on every hand to show chat*"the servants who render
service are not properly paid, and that the well-to-do class ought
voluntarily to pay the servants for every little act. This sys
tem degrades the servant and puts him in an attitude o f a beg
gar— a beggary which the giver of tips encourages in spite of
himself. The whole practice which universally prevails in
Europe emphasizes the relation of master and servant, of
master and dependent, in tvhich the servant is .o be thankful
for gifts, and it is injurious both to the one who gives and the
one who receives and illustrates the false standards o f living
which are being established in this country. Men who serve
ought to be properly paid in the first instance and not com
pelled to be put in the attitude of beggars in order to make a
living. It lowers the moral tone o f the American Republic.
M O N OPO LIE S* E V IL
AND DANGEROUS M E TH O D S.
Mr. President, piling up stupendous wealth in a few hands is
dangerous to the welfare o f the country. The Senator from
89032—8445
Wisconsin, in his remarks on Senate bill No. 3023 a year ago,
pointed out that practically 100 directors, interlocked with each
other, controlled all of the great corporations of transportation,
telegraph, telephone, express, and industrials in the United
States. He gave their names and the corporations wT
hich they
controlled in part.
In the remarks which I had the honor to submit on February
25, 1908, upon this bill (S. 3023), I pointed out the ability of a
few men in New York to create a panic whenever they wanted
to, and I pointed out how they could profit by it.
A few men control the management of the banks in New
York City, Boston, Philadelphia, and Chicago, with associate
banks throughout the country, and can make the stock market
go up or down as they please by the simplest of all processes,
to w it:
BY R E S T R IC T IN G
CRE D ITS
when they want the market to go down—
BY E X T E N D IN G C R E D IT S FREELY
when they want the market to go up.
The panic of 1893 was an artificial panic, because it was
brought about in this manner for the purpose of putting an end
to the talk of remonetizing silver, and as a political argument,
ingeniously and powerfully exerted, it did finally put an end
to it.
I was in the banking business myself at that time, and re
ceived a circular letter from New York pointing out the mis
chievous character of the discussion favoring remonetization of
silver; that it was driving gold abroad. Several letters fol
lowed along the same line, and, I am informed, and believe, that
these circulars were sent out at the instance of a committee
representing banks belonging to the New York clearing house;
that it was the definite and predetermined policy then and there
to constrict credits; and that, finally, these banks struck the
crowning blow by “ calling,” in June, 1893, the large volume of
demand loans then on the street for immediate payment, when
the usual credit accommodations were already quite cut off by
these banks and their associate institutions and other associated
financiers.
When this panic was over the weaker elements of the financial
world by thousands had been compelled to give up their prop
erties to the financial masters, who had accumulated cash for
the purpose o f taking over the property of less farsighted and
powerful operators.
I pointed out in my remarks February 25, 1908, the astonish
ing manner in which these forces had caused the stock market
to go up and down by which the unwary have been fleeced of
their property during the preceding ten years.
The panic of 1907 was an artificial panic, brought about by
conspiracy, in my opinion, o f men discussed by President Roose
velt as “ malefactors of great wealth.”
I think his description was precise and apt, and I think that
the Senate ought never to be content until a proper inquiry has
been made into the panic of 1907, to determine who the bene
ficiaries were o f that artful, crafty, far-reaching, and terrible
conspiracy, which has thrown millions of men out of employ
ment and brought tears and grief to the unnumbered women
and children in this land who have suffered the consequence of
that financial panic.
I was informed with regard to what might be expected to
happen nearly a year before it did happen.
The panic of 1907 was brought about by a prolonged bull
movement, free extension o f credits, maintaining stocks and
bonds at a high figure until in suflicient volume they were loaded
upon the unwary, to whom money was freely loaned on a proper
margin, and then began the process of restricting credits, slowly,
steadily, firmly, the masters of the market, the high priests of
monopoly, having accumulated an immense volume of cash and
cash credits, to be used when the market struck bottom. Thls
they did, with the most magnificent results, making unnunA>eY 1
millions out o f the weaker \ Auehts who had been led into the
trap of obtaining credits.
It is true that the panic resulted in paralyzing productive en
ergies of the American people, disturbing credits throughout the
whole world, and throwing millions of men out of employment
and causing unspeakable suffering to many millions o f women
and children. But monopoly had its reward, if the accumulation
o f money beyond the needs o f a human being can be called a re
ward ; if a callous heart and deadened sensibilities to the suffer
ings o f human kind can be called a reward.
I wish to say to the chairman o f the Committee on Finance
that his committee is, in my judgment, honor bound to deter
mine who the beneficiaries o f that financial panic were and to
take steps against the possibility o f its repetition. There was a
double purpose in this panic. One was that the very powerful
financially might double their holdings of property by smash
ing values, accumulating cash and cash credits, and buying
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
in the stocks and bonds of weak financiers who could not stand
the storm.
Another purpose was to discredit Theodore Roosevelt, whose
neart had been moved by a resolute purpose to protect the
People against such sinister forces.
In his message of January 31, 1908, he said:
rp.
W H O C O M M IT H ID E O U S
W RON G,
tlono , attacks hy these great corporations on the administration’s acnew«n ave been £ iven a wide circulation through the country, in the
scion i pers and otherwise, by those writers and speakers who, conWeai«iy °*r unconsciously, act as the representatives of predatory
inimVif 0* Gie wealth accumulated on a giant scale by all forms of
unurh i ’ ranSlnK from the oppression of wage-workers to unfair and
the n, Kn0me methods of crushing out competition, and to defrauding
e
Wealth lic
stockjobbing and the manipulation of securities. Certain
m
ar> 7 me? of this stamp, whose conduct should be abhorrent to every
of tea* i P^hinary decent conscience and who commit the hideous wrong
dinni.ii
our young men that phenomenal business success must orit an
“ e hasod on dishonesty, have during the last few months made
Their arent that they have banded together to work for a reaction,
ter « , e i eavor Is to overthrow and discredit all who honestly adminisanu p ' . *aw> to prevent any additional legislation which would check
e
whi r h . i n them, and to secure, if possible, a freedom from all restraint,
Unch
permit every unscrupulous wrongdoer to do what he wishes
a(A
0(1 Proyided he has enough money. The only way to counterto
e moveinent in which these men are engaged is to make clear
cne Public just what they are seeking to accomplish in the present.
33
I call attention to some of these figures, however: Adams
Express went from 114 to 315, about 300 per cent; the AllisChalmers Company went from 4 to 27, over 600 per cent.
Amalgamated Copper, one o f the giant concerns of this country,
from 33 to 130, 400 per cent. And so it goes on through the list.
THE MONOPOLY PROTECTING T A R IF F SHORTENS
THE LIFE OF LA B O R AND EXPOSES IT TO GREATER
M ORTALITY.
Mr. President, in the last forty years the world has wonder
fully improved in medical knowledge. It has wonderfully im
proved in inventive processes, which have led to increased
conveniences of life, which have developed the most important
economies o f production, manufacture, and distribution.
All of these things have tended to the prolongation of human
life where people could receive the full benefit of them; so
much so, that it is probably no excessive estimate to say that
the average o f human life in the well-to-do classes has been
increased by a period of ten years. It has been one o f the
wonderful developments of increasing modern intelligence.
It is a grievous thing, therefore, to observe that notwith
standing these great benefits, which ought to be a common her
The absurd fluctuations of stocks controlled by these high itage o f the human race, and notwithstanding the increasing
a^ciers, I set forth at the time, illustrate the unspeakable longevity of the well-to-do classes, the entire average of life
1 y of any citizen trusting himself upon a market capable of shown by the mortality tables has not been improved. The
J
C il unc°htrolled manipulation. Monte Carlo is perfectly inno- number of jiersons who die per thousand is substantially the same.
pC
Mr. President, I submit the comparative mortality statistics
de f
tbe side ° f this gigantic gambling house with its wonrfully improved modern machinery for misleading the judg- of our country and the other civilized nations of the world.
The mortality statistics exhibit the remarkable fact that just
ent of the ordinary citizen, with its secret pitfalls and inin degree as poverty obtains and governments permit monopoly,
qn?us traps by which to defraud our people,
n
spirit of monopoly—the idea of getting something for without protecting the weaker elements from dangerous ex
othing—has done a great harm to the American people. Hun- posure, just in that degree the number o f deaths from all causes
, rods of thousands of people are the beneficiaries of it and rises in the annual average.
auy millions are the victims o f it. Those who are enriched
It is a very important matter, and it shows that just in de
y it set new standards of extravagant living, of wasteful expen- gree as thoughtful men write their laws for the preservation of
iture, and of false pride and bad example, the imitation of human life to that degree is human longevity extended; to that
oeh has made the American citizen notorious throughout the degree there is the conservation of the best o f all national re
'vhole world.
sources— the lives of the children, the lives of the workingmen
This bill, Mr. President, is a taproot from which monopoly and working women o f the country.
Lartjy draws its power, fattens, grows strong, and overshadows
The following table gives the number o f people per thousand,
»e land like an evil tree killing and impairing the life o f those who died in the following countries from 1903 to 1906 (p. 28 of
stand beneath.
the Mortality Statistics of the Census Office for 1907) :
The violent manner in which the monopolists of this country
ipKgle the stock market subjects it to tremendous changes from
Country.
1903.
1904.
1905.
1903.
*®e to time, as shown in the following quotations:
Y -these ranges are since 1900, and will be found in the New
°rk Times Weekly National Quotation Review, page 13. of Ceylon......................................................................
25.9
24.9
27.7
34.3
Hungary-------- ----------------------------------------------26.1
27.8
21.8
24.8
-l£toher 21, 1907:
High.
Spain_______________________________________
Low.
Ita ly.-------------------- ---------------------------------------
AldC ohE,xpre8fl.................................................
Am,ar f ainated Copper........................................
W
nan
Suear Co..........................
A£er.nan Grass Twine______________________
Arn^ £ an P ide and Leather................... ..........
A & an Snuff Co..............................................
AmpH^an §,teel Foundries.....................— ,------Ateh?s n - oolcn C °LalH^0D’ Topeka and Santa Fe...........................................................
Lew 1 1 and Ohio__________________ __________________
0 -0
henv^are’ J
IjRC,cawanna and Western..................................................
hubifh aSd 1410 Grftnde____________________________________ ,_____
Gen«r„i J?,outh Shore and Atlantic.......................................................
Gro ^ Electric............................................................................. .............
Iow«nL02 .hem Preferred........................................................................
Kan?wll? and Michigan___________________ _________________
& ‘v»uiS U Z * " ---------------S uucKor ice___
r
3 6 Erie and W'estem............................ ...........................................
Manhattan Beach............................................................................... .
Missouri, Kansas and Texas R. R____________________________
National Biscuit Co............... ..............................................................
New York, Chicago and 8 t. Louis.................................................
New York Central.................................................................................
Norfolk and Western___________ ______________________________
Northern Pacific..........................................................................______
Northern Central________________________________ _____________
Ontario Mining......................................... .............................................
Pennsylvania Railroad........................................................................
Peoria and Eastern...............................................................................
Pere Marquette_________________________________ _____________
Pullman Co.............................. ... ..... ......................................................
Reading............. .........-____________________________ _____________
Tennessee Coal and Iron___________________________ __________
United Rallwayg Investment_____ _______________________________
United States Cast Iron.............................................. - .....................
United States Express________________________________________
United States Leather.........................................................................
United States Steel___________________ _______________________
89032— 8445-------5
315
27
130
33
57
272
62
13
91
30
250
18
48
110
125
509
53
24
334
348
57
76
39
85
76
22
43
85
76
174
97
700
250
13
170
50
106
268
164
166
98
53
160
20
55
114
4
33
9
24
142
3
2
20
5
26
3
7
18
55
171
16
4
109
140
11
10
7
8
12
4
9
23
11
99
22
45
150
1
110
5
20
148
15
25
9
6
45
6
8
France----------------- ---------------------
----------------
Unite;! States---------------------------------------------Netherlands...........................................................
N orw ay.-------- --------------------------- ------- ---------Denmark_______ _____________ ______________
United Kingdom----------------- -----------------------Australasia.......................................... *................
New Zealand-------------------------------------------------
24.8
25
23.8
2*2.4
20
19.2
20
16.1
15.6
14.8
14.7
15.8
11.8
10.4
24.4
25.8
23.7
21.1
21.2
19.4
19.6
16.6
15.9
14.3
14.1
16.5
10.8
9.6
25.4
25.9
25
21.9
21.9
19.6
19.8
16.2
15.3
14.8
15
15.5
10.5
9.3
26.2
20.8
19.9
16.1
34.8
13.7
13.5
15.6
10.6
9.3
There is no table which has ever been read in this body that
has such vital significance as that table, which shows that if
the people of the United States took the same pains to pre
serve the life o f the Nation that New Zealand has done, we
would save over six to the thousand; and, measured by our
80,000,000 people, it would mean a saving to this country of
over 500,000 lives annually. Pittsburg is no exception in the ex
posure o f human life to bad conditions. It is merely illustrative.
The policy of New Zealand is expressed in their great motto,
“ Retter reduc^ want than increase w ealth; ” and when you
reduce want, even if it be at the expense of Increasing wealth,
you prolong human life. You make life worthy to be lived,
and you raise the standard of men physically, morally, and
spiritually.
Let our national standard be “ Jfen first, then wealth."
New Zealand has abolished monopoly and given a more even
distribution o f the opportunities of life to willing labor than
any other country in the world, and it offers to the United
States an example o f how to care for its people, because the
difference of these vital statistics o f an average of 9.9 deaths
per annum out o f a thousand and 16.3 per thousand, makes a
difference of 6.4 per thousand, or the vast multitude o f 512,000
people who annually die in the United States in excess of the
deaths that would occur under more favorable conditions of
life. Are they not worth preserving as fully as we agree on the
conservation o f our other national resources?
34
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
B E T T E R REDUCE W A N T THAN’ IN C R E A SE W E A L T H .
The death rates in our cities, especially the industrial cities,
seems to run still higher than the general average; for example,
In New Zealand they do not impose a tariff tax artfully
the annual average number o f deaths from all causes, per thou drawn to make the poor poorer and the rich richer. In New
sand population for 1901 to 1905, was as follows (id., pp. 91 Zealand they do not establish a tariff under the false pretense
and 9 2 ):
of raising revenue, where the legislator openly or secretly in
In M assachusetts:
tends the tariff rate not to raise revenue, but to prevent importa
Boston________
18. 8 tion, to prevent competition, and to protect monopoly in the
20. 3
Pall River____
2 0 . 2 home market.
L o w e ll________
Providence, R. I _ _ .
New York City____
Pittsburg, P a _____
Philadelphia_______
Norristown, P a____
18.
19.
20.
18.
24.
8
0
7
2
5
Notwithstanding the fact that the cities with their oppor
tunity of cooperation in improved water supply, sewerage,
hospital service, and sanitary supervision ought to have better
health than those less favorably situated. The heavy death
rate in cities is due to the extreme high death rate among the
very poor, who are compelled to live in insanitary places and
are otherwise exposed, while the more favored population of the
cities would show a better rate than the average.
T a b l e 2 1 .— D eath, r a te s fro m a ll ca u s es p e r 1,000 population in regis
tr a tio n S ta te s in 1900.
169. 77
Connecticut_____
174. 93
M aine___________
177. 36
M assachusetts__
138. 67
Michigan________
179. 79
New Hampshire.
1 7 3 .7 8
New Jersey_____
179. 21
New York_______
190. 78
Rhode Island __
169. 62
Verm ont_________
Table 95, Abstract of the Census, 1900, shows a heavy mor
tality in manufacturing cities and in cities where negroes live.
For example, per thousand, from all causes:
Augusta, M e_____
Baltimore, M d____
Biddeford. Me____
Boston, M ass_____
Cincinnati. O hioHoboken. N. J ____
Jersey City. N. J
Pittsburg. P a ____
Philadelphia, P a -
26. 4
21. 0
.1
23 2
21
19. 1
21 . 1
20. 7
20. 0
21. 2
The Census Bulletin No. 77 gives an interesting account of
42 of the so-called “ dusty trades,” showing, for example, that
o f polishers who die between 25 and 34 years, 56 per cent of
such deaths are due to consumption. That the per cent of like
deaths due to consumption in each age group is very high; for
example, between the ages o f 25 and 34 years, 70 per cent of
the grinders who die, die of consumption; 59 per cent of the
tool makers, 50 per cent o f the gold-leaf makers 50 per cent of
brass workers, 56 per cent of printers, 66 per cent o f compos
itors, 61 per cent of engravers, 52 per cent of stone workers, 50
per cent o f marble workers, 56 per cent of glass blowers, 46 per
cent of glass cutters, 44 per cent of plasterers, 49 per cent of
paper hangers, 62 per cent of lithographers, 68 per cent o f the
hosiery and knitting mill employees, 50 per cent o f spinners, 53
per cent of weavers, 50 per cent of rope makers, 55 per cent of
cabinetmakers, 62 per cent o f wood turners, 55 per cent of hat
ters, 52 per cent o f silk-mill employees, 58 per cent o f uphol
sterers, showing that workers in these dusty trades are very
liable to die of tuberculosis.
This table shows that the exposure of human dfe to dust and
hard conditions leads to the destruction of human life by tuber
culosis in a serious way. I think these tables are of interest.
Mr. President, I deem it my duty to call the attention o f the
country to the fact that this death rate stands ia startling con
trast to the death rate o f New Zealand, where the average for
1901 to 1906 was less than 10 deaths per thousand. It is equally
important, in considering the reason for the greater security of
life in New Zealand, to remember that in New Zealand the peo
ple take great care to prevent the destruction of human life by
the extremes of poverty.
______________ -— .______ _______
Finally, Mr. President, T wish to call the attention of the
Senate to the fact that in New Zealand great pains is taken to
protect the people against monopoly, against the appropriation
o f everything in heaven and on earth, everything visible or in
visible "by men, because they happen to have piled up available
credit at their command. In New Zealand they believe that
the land was made for the use and benefit o f the living genera
tion, who make it desirable to live in. Therefore they control
monopoly in that great Republic. We have copied them before
in their political processes when we adopted the greatest o f all
means for the control of fraud in elections by the adoption of
the Australian ballot, and we will do well to imitate them in
other matters, where they protect the living generation against
the uncontrolled and natural ambition and gre?d o f man for
wealth and power.
89032—8445
T H E P U R P O SE S OP T A X A T IO N .
Constitutionally, a tax can have no other basis than the raising of a
revenue for public purposes, and whatever governmental exaction has
not this basis is tyrannical and unlawful. A tax on imports, therefore,
the purpose of which is not to raise a revenue, b u t to d isco u ra g e and
in d ir e c tly p r o h ib it so m e p a r tic u la r im p o r t f o r th e b en efit o f so m e hom e
m a n u fa ctu re, m a y -well be q u es tio n ed as b ein g m erely co lo ra b le, and
th e r e f o r e n o t w a r ra n ted b y c o n s titu tio n a l p rin cip les.
(Cooley, Prin.
Con. Law, 57.)
The Supreme Court of the United States, in the Topeka case, said :
“ To lay with one hand the power of the Government on the property
of the citizen and with the other to bestow it upon favored individuals
to aid private enterprises and build tip p r iv a te fo r tu n e s is n o n e th e less
a r o b b e r y b eca u se i t is d o n e u n d er th e fo rm s o f la w and is ca lled
‘ ta x a tio n .’
This is not legislation; it is a decree under legislative
form s.”
(20 W all., 664, in Loan Asso. v. Topeka.)
New Zealand pursues the policy
B ET T ER REDUCE W A N T T H A N IN C R E A SE W E A L T H
and imposes a 10 per cent inheritance tax on estates of one
hundred thousand and more, and imposes also an income tax.
New Zealand does not hesitate to protect her working units
from excessive house rent, providing concrete houses at a low
rate o f interest.
I am not unaware of the fact that this latter suggestion will
furnish occasion to the clamorous advocates o f special privileges
to burst into a chorus of denunciation against New Zealand,
that this is socialism. It is true that it is socialistic. But no
wise policy should be condemned by a mere epithet “ socialism,”
for our post-office system and common-school system, and
municipal waterworks, sewers and streets system are “ social
istic.” New Zealand believes that the land upon which the New
Zealanders live and move and have their being ought not
to be monopolized by the very rich, nor used by them through
the acquirement of titles to dictate terms upon which the New
Zealanders shall be allowed to live.
The New Zealanders must be a very foolish people. They
actually believe that the land upon which they live should be
controlled in the interest of the living generation of men who
cultivate it and make it beautiful. I understand that this fool
ish doctrine is contrary to the fundamental canons of monopoly.
It violates the fundamental law o f Continental Europe and
of Great Britain. It would overthrow the idea of the good
old days of William the Conqueror when he took charge of
Britain and parceled the lands among his warlike leaders.
These titles have thence come down in the good old way,
and the dukes and princes of England, and o f Germany, of
Austria, and o f Russia still hold the titles and in measure still
impose their will upon the inhabitants thereof. It is also true
that this special class of landed nobles, who exercised monopoly
o f the land, having finally learned that they could only eat so
much and only wear so much and only occupy a given number
o f palaces were obliged to throw out the younger brothers of
each succeeding family, and, human selfishnees having become
satiated in princely and luxurious living, have turned them
selves to some extent to the service of their fellow-men. But
they have had the wisdom and been compelled to limit the ex
tortion which their legal rights made possible.
Indeed, they had a great example in France, which was serv
iceable in teaching them not to go too far. It was this monop
oly o f land— the Senator from New York [Mr. D epew] to the
contrary notwithstanding—which caused the French revolution,
sending the land monopolists to the guillotine, and resulted in
the minute subdivision of the lands of France among those who i
tilled the soil and made it productive.
th e ^ l
greed o f modern times. T do not blame an Individual for ex
hibiting the natural tendency o f humiin life. I do not blame a
man for becoming greedy for wealth and power; ail o f us have
these impulses; but I do blame the laws which persist in shel
tering him at the expense o f those who are entitled to protection
in the constitutional right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness.
I wish to call attention to what is the effect o f monopoly.
Monopoly is worse in Europe than in our country because under
the rule in Europe the land was monopolized in the first place
by imperial power, and the control o f the land was handed down
to dukes, princes, and various others, and those people who come
to our shores and are willing to submit to any kind o f treatment
do so because they come from conditions of monopoly more
severe than those which we have in our own country.
35
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD,
It was the monopoly of land which led to the French revolu
tion, notwithstanding the comments of the Senator from New
York, who attributed it to other reasons. Thomas Jefferson,
when minister to France in 1785, pointed out the terrific effect
of land monopoly in that Empire. He said:
Then Joseph said unto the people, “ Behold I have bought you this
day, and your land for P h araoh : lo, here is seed for you, and ye shall
sow the land.
“ And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the
fifth part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed
of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and
for food for your little ones.
The property of France is absolutely concentrated in a very few
hands, having- revenues of from half a million of guineas a year down
ward. These employ the flower of the country as servants, some of
them having as many as 200 domestics, not laboring. They employ also
a great number of manufacturers and tradesmen, and. lastly, the class
of laboring husbandmen.. But, after all, there comes the most numerous
of all the classes; that is, the poor, who can not find work.
I asked
myself what could be the reason that so many should be permitted to
beg who are willing to work in a country where there is a very con
siderable proportion of uncultivated lands? Those lands are undis
tributed only for the sake of game. It should seem, then, that it must
be because of the enormous wealth of the proprietors, which places them
above attention to the increase of their revenues by permitting these
lands to be labored.
Mr. President, we probably in this day of greater liberty and
greater enlightenment would rise in revolution against the dicta
tion of Pharaoh in this form, but the practice upon which
Pharaoh acted, the principle upon which he established a mo
nopoly in a necessary o f life by the exercise of his legal rights
and thereby acquired, by mastery of prices, all of the property
of the Egyptians and made them his commercial servants and
slaves, are in full play in this Republic under the operation of
a thousand varieties of monopolies, dictating prices upon all
of the necessaries of life and gradually absorbing, I may say,
Mr. President, rapidly absorbing, all of the property of this
Republic.
Pharaoh and his captains gave the Egyptians four-fifths of
what they produced. The present masters of monopoly do not
give to labor so large a part o f what it produces. I have dem
onstrated by Exhibit 1 the wages paid as compared to the
value of the gross product, and have demonstrated by those
tables that taking the raw materials at the factory and calcu
lating the additional value created directly by labor, it does not
receive one-half of the value it actually creates, much less
four-fifths, which was the rule established by Pharaoh.
Mr. President, it may seem austere to recall the monopoly of
Pharaoh, but I think it very important that the Senate of the
United States should consider and feel itself more actively re
sponsible for the development and care of the interest of the
productive masses o f the Republic. I have no desire to hold
the leaders of the Republican party responsible for the drift of
modern times. I shall be content to see them exert themselves
to retain its good features and restrain its bad features.
I am willing to exculpate them. I will be very glad to see
them take advantage of a great opportunity to make themselves
permanently the representatives o f the people if they will only
give those things to the people which they are in honor bound to
give to enable them to enjoy life, liberty, the pursuit of happi
ness, and the fruits of their own industry, which are now filched
from them by prices 50 per cent higher than the prices of the
world.
I have always felt sorry for the French nobility, for the socalled “ flower of France,” and have wondered why it was they
were incapable of realizing the fatal danger which their greed,
their extravagance, and their frivolity engendered. They played
with a powder magazine of human passion which finally ex
ploded.
Our laws should protect the people in the peaceful enjoyment
of life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and o f the fruits of
their own industry. I f the laws fail, there will be built up in
this country a powder magazine of human passion that may
some day explode with fatal consequences.
A safety valve has been furnished, for possible danger to the land
monopolist and other thence engendered monopolists o f conti
nental Europe, by modern transportation, which has permitted
their great surplus of population to go toother parts of the world
and build up homes by their peaceful labor, where they would
not be subject to princes or potentates or to tyranny in any form,
whether governmental, religious, or plutocratic; and our fore
fathers came to this land to free themselves from this tyranny
and to establish a government whose fundamental doctrine was
that the precious privileges o f life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness were inalienable. That is to say, Mr. President, the
individual could not deprive himself o f them if he would; that
he had no right to deprive himself of these things.
It has remained for the representatives of the people in Con
gress to permit the dangers of monopoly to grow up by special
privileges granted by statute, by building up a monopoly breed
ing tariff, by which foreign competition has been cut off and
home competition controlled and commercial mastery o f our
People established by the organization o f trusts, by secret
agreements, and by gigantic mergers, which embraced in one
corporate body every competitor.
Mr. President, there is no evil to a free people more dangerous
in every way than financial and commercial monopoly.
When a monopoly is organized strong enough to dictate the
Prices of the product of labor, or to dictate the prices of the
necessaries of life to the laborer and the entire people, there has
also been established a commercial master on the one side and a
commercial slavery on the other. The Standard Oil Company,
Which fixes the price o f crude oil to the producer and fixes the
Price of kerosene and gasoline to the consumer, regardless of
values either to one or the other, exercises a commercial mas
tery that differs in degree, but does not differ in kind with the
hiastery which Pharaoh exercised over the Egyptians when he
established a monopoly in corn in Egypt.
Mr. President, under the advice of Joseph, Pharaoh and his
captains stored all the surplus corn o f Egypt during seven years
of plenty. They exercised their legal rights. During the seven
years of drought which followed they had the richest monopoly
recorded in history.
The price of corn went up; the price o f corn went sky-high
under this monopoly o f the home market. The Holy Bible ad
vises us that, in exchange for enough o f this monopolized
product—
W IIO
IS
G ETTIN G A L L
THE
N ET P RO D U CTS OF LABOR
IN
T H IS
COUNTRY?
Mr. President, it is perfectly obvious to thoughtful men that
the tremendous accumulation of wealth in a few hands is lead
ing to the rapid monopolization of every natural opportunity.
Nearly all of our national transportation is so controlled. There
is obvious control by monopoly o f telegraph, telephone, the ex
press, of lumber, of building material, of coal, of cotton manu
factures and woolen manufactures, of farm machinery, of oil,
of iron, of steel and their products; and on the other hand w'e
have a rather pitiful condition of extreme poverty exhibiting
itself in all o f our great cities, side by side with this enormous
concentration of wealth.
Mr. President, I believe we have the best people in the w orld ;
that even our masters of monopoly have shown a greater meas
ure o f liberality in their gigantic benefactions to the people
from whom their fortunes have been drawn than any men in
the history of the world. I rejoice in their benevolence. I
know that they are neither hard-hearted nor lacking in gener
ous impulse; they have simply been following the rules of busi
ness established by a rigorous commercial age, where “ divi
dends ” were emblazoned on every battle flag and “ success ” —
“ financial success ” —was the only standard. It is no wonder
that the weak and the poor and the inarticulate mass have
been forgotten in the fierce contest for wealth and power.
We have a wonderful country and a great and magnificent
people. We have a great mass o f the middle classes of people,
who are not in penury, have neither riches nor poverty, but
Joseph gathered up all the money that was found in the land comprise the bulwark o f this Republic, whose patriotism, whose
of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, for the corn which they wisdom, whose penetrating intelligence can be perfectly relied
bought.
* *
*
And when money failed in the land of Egypt, and in the land of upon; and the petty larceny of the two millions o f our revenue
Canaan, all the Egyptians came unto Joseph and said. “ Give us by the sugar trust, to which they pleaded guilty in New York
bread, for why should we die in thy presence? for the money faileth.”
within the last few days, being but a trivial circumstance be
And Joseph said. " Give your c a ttle ; and I will give you for your
side the universal plundering of the national pocketbook by
cattle, if money fa il.”
And they brought their cattle unto Joseph, and Joseph gave them the wholesale fraudulent prices fixed by the monopolies of this
bread in exchange for horses, and for the flocks, and for the cattle country, our great middle class, conservative and sound, will
o f the herds, and for the asses.
soon correct these evils at the ballot box.
And the Egyptians then gave up to this triumphant monop
I am deeply disappointed that the party in power has appar
oly all o f their land in exchange for corn for bread.
ently lost its opportunity to serve the people by removing the
And Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh, for the tariff wall sheltering monopoly and by lowering prices in the
Egyptians sold every man his field because the famine prevailed over
United States.
them, so the land became Pharaoh’s . ,
89032— 8445
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
36
M ONOPOLY H A S SU B JE CTE D LABOR TO IRREGU LAR E M P L O Y M E N T .
The American workman has been subjected to foreign pauper
The panic of 1907 was caused by monopoly and by the danger competition; he has been refused the right to organize for his
ous plutocracy our system has erected in the United States, own protection.
as I fully set forth on February 25, 1908. This panic threw
He has been denied his political liberty.
out of employment millions of men, two millions of whom are
He has been compelled to march in political parades against
out of employment now, according to the recent report of his will.
Samuel Gompers, president of the American Federation of
He has been compelled to vote against his conscience under
Labor, from whose report I quote:
the threat of being discharged or denied the opportunity of
Permit me to call attention to t h i s : A t the beginning of December, working for his living.
1908, I sent out a circular letter to the executive officers of a number
of international trade unions of America and got from them a report
as to the state o f employment and unemployment, and from the reports
which were made to me within fifteen or twenty days I culled the fo l
lowing in form ation:
The blacksmiths report during the past year about 50 per cent of
the trade unemployed; those employed averaging about four days a
week.
Boiler makers and iron-ship builders, 30 per cent unemployed.
Boot and shoe workers, 25 per cent unemployed.
Bridge and structural-iron workers, 25 per cent unemployed.
Carpenters and joiners, 40 per cent'unemployed.
Wood carvers, 30 per cent unemployed.
Cement workers. 30 per cent unemployed.
Cigar makers, 10 per cent unemployed.
Commercial telegraphers, 15 per cent unemployed.
Coopers, 15 per cent unem ployed; two-thirds of the employed work
ing half time.
Elevator constructors, 40 per cent unemployed.
Steam and hot-water fitters, employment in the W est f a i r ; in the
East fully 40 per cent unemployed and working about one hundred and
eighty days a year.
Freight handlers, about 30 per cent unemployed.
Glass-bottle blowers, about 20 per cent unemployed. On account of
conditions of the trade, no work is performed during July or August.
Window-glass blowers, 20 per cent unemployed.
Granite cutters, about 15 per cent unemployed.
Hatters, men working about three-fourths time.
Hod carriers and building laborers, 60 per cent unemployed.
Hotel and restaurant employees, 30 per cent unemployed.
Machinists, 20 per cent unemployed.
Railway maintenance-of-way employees, 25 per cent unemployed.
Butcher workmen, 40 per cent unemployed.
Coal miners, work about two hundred days during the year.
Painters and decorators, 70 per cent unemployed.
Pattern makers, 30 per cent unemployed.
Pavers and rammer men, 25 per cent unemployed.
Printing pressmen, 20 per cent unemployed.
Shipwrights, joiners, and calkers, 50 per cent unemployed.
Tile layers, “ state of employment very poor.”
Tin-plate workers, 40 per cent unemployed.
Tobacco workers, working on two-thirds time.
Iron molders, 70 per cent unemployed.
I am sure it is not an exaggeration to say that there are now in our
country, and have been with little variation since October, 1907, nearly
2 .0 0 0 . 000 of wage-earners unemployed.
THE
D EFENSE
OF
TH ESE
SC H E D U L E S
UNSOUND.
Mr. President, the chairman of the Committee on Finance, on
June 4, made the only defense which has been offered of these
high schedules, and in discussing the matter he said:
In general, it may be stated that the wages of textile operatives in
America are double those of England, France, and Germany. A very
exhaustive inquiry has recently been made into the subject of wages by
the British Board of Trade, which shows that in Germany the wages of
cotton weavers run from lGs. 6d. to 19s. 6d.. or from $4.12 to $4.S7 per
w eek ; that in France the wages run from 16s. lOd. to 19s. 2d., or from
$4.20 to $4.79 per week ; that in Great Britain the wages run from 16s.
to 24s. l i d ., or from $4 to $6.22 per week.
For the United States the Bureau of Labor, in Bulletin No. 77, July,
1908, shows that the average wages of ali cotton weavers for the year
1907 was $9.74.
In addition. I may state that in many of the fine
yarn mills of New England making high-priced fancy fabrics the weavers
earn from $11 to $13 per week.
Many of the fabrics that will be dutiable under these provisions are
valued at a dollar a pound. The cost of the cotton is 20 cents a pound
at the outside, leaving 80 cents a pound for cost of labor in various
forms in this country.
Suppose that that labor costs twice as much
in the cotton-manufacturing States of the United States as it does in
our competing countries abroad, it is easy to see by a mathematical cal
culation that 50 per cent ad valorem, to say nothing about 45 per cent,
will not equalize the conditions on these various high-priced goods be
tween our own and competing countries.
If this was an original proposition, and we were to submit to the Sen
ate rates which were protective and adequate, in view of the difference
in the cost of production, we could not make them any lower than those
fixed in these specific rates which we have asked the Senate to adopt.
The chairman takes the wages of the cotton weavers of Ger
many, France, and Great Britain for 1905, reported by the
British Board of Trade to Parliament, just after the panic,
and compares these wages with the weavers in the United
States for 1907, and withholds the statement made in the
report from which he quotes that the wages o f ribbon weavers
at St. Etienne, France, was twice as great in 1906 as in 1905
and 50 per cent higher in 1907 than in 1905.
The chairman does not point out that the spinners, both
male and female, in the United States, by these same tables,
Secretary Stra us . D o you mean by that that before that period those were paid less wages in the cotton industry in the United
2 .0 0 0 . 000 were employed?
States than they were in Germany or France. The male
Mr. G om pe rs . I do, sir.
spinners received $4.12 a week in the United States. $5.91 in
Secretary S tra us . Are there not always some unemployed?
Mr. G om pe rs . In some trades, some callings, and seasons, yes, s i r ; France, and $6.57 in Germany, and the spinners in the woolen
hut up to October, 1907, and for a few years just prior thereto, it was industries were paid $6.52 in the United States, $6.22 to $6.81
a practical fact that any man who could work could find work to do.
I in France, and $7.20 to $7.79 in Germany. The foreign weavers
refer to the condition now of the men who want to work and who can
were paid less than our weavers and the foreign spinners
find no work to do.
It is probably one of the greatest tributes that can be paid to all our were paid more than our spinners, and the chairman of the
people— and I think in a great measure that credit belongs to the organ Committee on Finance withholds this important fact.
ized workers, organized labor— that during that whole period of nearly
It is impossible to follow a leadership that is either careless
eighteen months, and two winters, with so vast a number of unemployed,
life and property have been secure and public order has been main or inaccurate in making statements for the guidance of the
tained : and I know of no force in all our country so potent as a con Senate.
The chairman has withheld information from this
servator of the public peace as the much-abused and maligned labor
organizations. In this morning’s papers we read of a demonstration body, and the quotations he offers, being a partial truth, are
of the unemployed in Berlin yesterday, where the sabers of the soldiery wholly untrustworthy and misleading.
were drawn to disperse hungry crowds.
It is set forth in the cable
Mr. President, this is the only defense that has been made,
grams that the unemployed there proposed socialistic remedies for re
lief.
I do not know of what those remedies or propositions for relief and in effect it amounts to this, that a pound of fabric o f cotton
consisted.
I take it that any proposition coming from the poor crowd costs 20 cents a pound for the cotton and 80 cents a pound for
of fellows who want work or relief would be regarded as extremely
the cost of labor.
radical. But the American workmen ask for no relief that can at all
The chairman proves too much; he leaves nothing for capital.
be construed as socialistic. The relief which we ask for the men
and women of our country who have been walking the streets in idle The statement is obviously false.
He leaves nothing for capital,
ness for eighteen months we ask upon high patriotic, practical, and for the enormous dividends paid by the cotton mills of his State.
humane grounds, and for good economic reasons. I know, of course,
He is flatly contradicted by the census, which shows that the
that we are often met, when these matters are presented, with the state
ment that they are paternalistic, and that our form of government does total labor cost in the entire textile industry is 19.5 per cent of
not admit of the Government undertaking projects that would smack the gross value of the product.
of paternalism. Yet in the great calamity which overtook the people
He is flatly contradicted in his contention by the census re
of Italy quite recently the Government of our country generously and
promptly appropriated $ 8 0 0,000 as the direct gift of the American
ports as to every schedule.
people as a whole
this in addition to the many generous contributions
He is flatly contradicted by Carroll D. Wright's report on rela
of our people in their individual capacity. No word of adverse criticism
has been indulged in. On the contrary, the appropriate i of this vast tive labor cost in 446 individual cases.
sum o f money was looked upon as a duty which in common humanity
The aggregate value o f the products of cotton mills for 1900
the people or our country owed to a stricken people.
It is only re was $332,806,156 (vol. 10, Table 14). The materials used cost
ferred to to illustrate the thought that the lingering hunger and misery
due to the unemployment of our people, brought about by forces en $116,108,879 (Table 13), and the total wages (Table 9) amounted
tirely beyond their control, should receive consideration at the hands of to $86,689,752, and for cotton small wares amounted to $<13,194.
our government, both national and state.
THE
M O N OPO LY P R O H IB IT IV E
T A R IF F H A S
TYRANNY.
EX PO SE D
A M E R IC A N
LABOR
TO
T otal c o s t _______________________________________________________$332, S06, 156
Material c o s t ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ $ 1 1 6 ,1 0 8 ,8 7 9
Total wages-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - $86, 689, 752
Per cent o f labor to gross product----------------------------------------26
Average per cent of tariff rate fixed by the Senate bill—
47. 14
Mr. President, the monopolies established under the prohibi
Approximately twice as much as the total wages paid the
tive tariff have almost entirely destroyed the organizations of
labor among their employees and have driven out in large meas American workmen, thus sheltering the manufacturer in mo
ure the liberty-loving Americans and have introduced in their nopoly by excluding foreign goods.
The chairman of the Committee on Finance, in the face of
place foreigners, who know but little of liberty— Slovaks, Bul
these census reports, rises in his place as an expert and tells
garians, Hungarians, Poles, Greeks, Italians.
89032— 8445
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
this Senate that the labor cost of these manufacturers is 80
per cent, when the truth is 26 per cent, and he justifies the cot
ton schedules upon this gross and indefensible error.
Granting that foreign goods have no labor cost whatever,
26 per cent is the maximum schedule to protect the American
workmen; 26 per cent is the maximum average rate required
if the Republican platform is to be carried out o f providing the
difference in the cost o f production at home and abroad.
If the labor cost abroad is one-half the labor cost in the
United States, the rate required to prevent the foreign manu
facturer from having the advantage in cheaper labor would be
26 per cent, the American cost, less 13 per cent, the European
c°st, or a net rate of 13 per cent.
The difference in the labor cost at home and abroad would
therefore be 13 per cent and not 47 per cent, as the schedule is
Written.
Mr. President, the gross error, to use the mildest terms possi
ble, of the Committee on Finance and the advocates o f a pro
37
hibitive tariff runs in like manner through other schedules,
the proof of which I submit. Taking the table of the com
mittee itself in print No. 3 of April 12, 1909, page 68, I place
side by side with the proposed ad valorem rate the total per
centage of labor cost to the value of the product, the proof of
which' will be found in Exhibit 1, taken from the census re
ports, and in the volumes on manufactures, of census, 1900,
and is verified by the figures of the Committee on Finance giv
ing wages and the value of products in columns 8 and 9.
I ask attention to the recapitulation compiled by the Commit
tee on Finance April 12, 1909, and ask permission to print that
table with an interlineation which I have placed in it showing,
from the figures submitted by the chairman of the Committee
on Finance in that table, what is the percentage of wages to
value of product as shown in 1904.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the re
quest of the Senator from Oklahoma? The Chair hears none.
The matter referred to is as follows:
Estimated revenues.
R E C A P IT U L A T IO N .
[Compiled by Committee on Finance, April 12, 1909.
The ad valorems are based on the dutiable values.]
Revenue under—
Schedules.
Value of mer
chandise (duti
able and free).
Present law
tact of 1897).
A—Chemicals, oils, and paints___________________
n—Earths, earthenware, and glassware_________
—Metals, and manufactures o f_________________
P—W ood, and manufactures o f__________________
i. Sugar, molasses, and manufactures o f______
F—Tobacco, and manufactures of___ ___________
Agricultural products and provisions_________
H—Spirits, wines, and other beverages__________
I—Cotton manufactures_____________ ___________
« ~ F la x , hemp, and. jute, and manufactures o f—
K—W ool, and manufactures o f__________________
Ij—Silks and silk goods-------- --------------------------------Pulp papers and books- ____________________
N—S undries......................................................................
Total from customs.............................. ...........
Proposed bill
(H. R. 1438).
$12,067,619.81
31,301,003.97
68,013,829..V
)
24,103,S10.!X)
92,781,081.69
20,959,03'.79
61,925.575.39
25,031,-129.91
Sl,Sr>.8M.07
114.172.202.94
C2.8iS.797.8t
38,613,819.20
20,005,023.62
135,821,481.03
$11,187,405.69
15,350,019.67
21,8 2,195.72
3,705,024.34
60,33S,.523.81
25.125,057.41
19,181,915.93
16,318,120.14
14,291,023.85
49 / 09,583.31
33,551,815.89
29,313,703.39
4,136,029.42
23,S93,513.49
$11,754,112.83
15,217,487.70
21,523,639.22
2,723,058.08
59,635,940.54
26,113,185.29
20,594,281.57
20,518,168.77
15,023,742.16
50,351,133.25
30,564,815.83
23,581,936.60
4,042,076.14
31,307,603.27
779,140,621.87
323,110,914.39
338,973,303.31
Pres
ent.
Per ct. Per ct.
27.62
28.20
49.03
48.70
32.41
31.65
15.12
11.21
65.03
65.30
87.20
87.18
30,16
32.28
70.69
S3.83
44. SI
47.14
43.67
44.07
58.13
'58.19
52.33
00.76
23.67
21.88
22.50
23.06
8
37.1
12.7
6$14,258,2£6
154,652,719
652.109.633
378,461,021
23,536,189
62,640,303
100,839,004
43,924,676
217,955,322
27,22!,.574
135,069,063
26,767,943
123.903.633
<340,593,132
*
“ $572,848,476
420,944,049
3,130,253,195
1,393,489,978
413,333,428
331,117,681
2,194,833,891
474,487,379
1,014,094,237
185,094,092
767,210,990
133,288,072
548,957,239
“ 1,954,228,027
72,331,938,518
'13,534,180,743
~I8~9~
5.7
8.9
26.0
13.3
19.7
22.6
16.2
19.9
7.5
36.7
20.8
27.1
5.6
18.9
4.5
9.2
21.4
14.6
17.6
20.0
22.6
18,3
9,862,388.95
Net increase..................................................................
Total luxuries, articles of voluntary use, duti
ab le.................................................................................
lQ tal necessaries, dutiable---------------- --------------- -
Volume
Per
IX,
Census of manufactures, 1905“ centage
(calendar year 1904).
Census
of
1900A
labor
cost to
value
Per
of
centage
prod
of
Value of prod ucts by
labor
ucts, including wages
Pro
custom work
Wages.
and
posed. cost to
value
and repairing. value,
of
as
prod
shown,
uct.
1904A
Equivalent
ad valorems.
—
283,411,901.2S
189,728,717.59
149,857,283.47
179,273,627.92
160,451,103.74
178,519,199.60
52.48
36.77
55.47
36.60
_
_____ _____ —
|
338,945,001.07 —
Total entries for consumption, dutiable and free. 1,415,*02,281.78
23.95
■^otal necessaries, dutiable and free___________
178,519,199.60
1,125,990,3S3.50
15.85
----------------" Industries grouped to conform as nearly as possible with the articles enumerated in the respective schedules of the tariff law
Indus
tries with products named in two or more schedules arc credited to the schedule which includes the major product.
The value of products
tor each group is the sum of ail products of all industries in the group, and hence includes a large amount of duplication due to the product
of one industry serving as material for another.
6 Should be $ 5 6 ,7 9 0 ,1 4 3 ; addition erroneous.
A Should be $273,95 9 ,3 2 0 (see page 6 7 ).
f Should be $2,2 7 7 ,8 3 8 543
''Should be $ 7 0 7 ,4 0 1 ,4 1 7 ; addition erroneous.
‘ Should be $1,495,6 8 0 ,4 3 7 (see page 6 7 ) .
'S h o u ld be $13 270 192 088
h Percentage of wages to value of product calculated and inserted by It. L. O w e n .
SC H E D U L E A---- C H E M IC A L S , ETC.
SC H E D U L E D---- WOOD, ETC.
Mr. OWEN. This table shows that the percentage o f labor to
G'-e value of the product in Schedule A, for example, by the very
figures given by the Finance Committee itself, is only 7.5 per
‘*ent, while the proposed schedule is 28 per cent—four times as
b !gh as the entire labor cost involved in the product.
In Schedule D the total labor cost is 27 per cent, and the
difference in labor cost in this country and abroad would be
134 per cent, not counting freight, which would be as much more
in favor of this heavy material; and here the proposed rate is
11 per cent, and this schedule ought to be absolutely free in
order to protect our forest and conserve our natural resources
otherwise, as well as supply our people with cheap building ma
terial and our publishers with cheap paper.
SC H E D U L E B — G L A S S W A R E , ETC.
In like manner in Schedule B the total labor cost is 36 per
cent. The total labor cost in Europe, if it were half as much,
would leave the net difference in labor cost only 18 per cent, {
while the proposed tariff is 48 per cent for Schedule B.
SC H E D U L E C— M E T A L S , ETC.
In like manner Schedule C exhibits a total labor cost of 20
per cent. The difference in this labor cost and the European
labor cost, accepting the statement o f the chairman of the Com
mittee on Finance that the labor cost in Europe is only half as
much, would be 10 per cent, and the difference in labor cost for
which the protection might be required would not exceed 10
per cent, but the proposed rate is 31 per cent— three times as
high as it ought to be for protective purposes.
89 0 3 2 — 8445
SC H E D U L E E-----SUGAR, ETC.
In Schedule E, sugar, and so forth, the labor cost is 5.6 per
cent; the difference in labor cost would be less than 3 per cent,
which would be more than offset by freight, and here the proIKised duty is 65 per cent, giving a complete monopoly to the
sugar trust, which takes nearly all the profit, leaving a small
fraction o f the profit to the sugar planter.
SC H E D U L E F ---- TOBACCO , ETC.
The total percentage of labor cost in tobacco manufactures is
18.9 per cent. The difference in this country and abroad, tak
ing the word of the chairman of the Committee on Finance.
38
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
would be approximately 9i per cent; the ad valorem rate o f the
Senate bill is 87 per cent.
SC H E D U L E G-----A G R IC U LT U R A L , ET C .
Here the labor cost is 4.5 per cent; the difference in labor
cost could not possibly equal the freight, and these products
might as well be free, with some very minor exceptions, even
from a standpoint of absolute protection.
But instead o f corresponding with the rate required to pro
tect, the rate is put at 32 per cent, which is perfectly silly, and
should not deceive the most stupid man that ever plowed a fur
row. For example, the tariff on corn is 15 cents a bushel (par.
227), and the total amount imported in 1907 was 9,000 bushels,
and the amount raised was 2,595,320,000 bushels.
And the farmers o f the country are flattered with 15 cents a
bushel tax to keep the pauper labor o f Europe from running
them out o f their cornfields. The American farmer who does
not see the hypocrisy of this schedule and the profound con
tempt which it exhibits for his intelligence is assuredly in
capable of reason.
SC H E D U L E I ---- COTTON
M A N U FA C TU R E S.
The labor cost in cotton manufactures, according to the fig
ures of the chairman of the Committee on Finance, is 21.4 per
cent. The difference in the labor cost in the United States and
abroad would be between 10 and 11 per cent. The schedule is
put at 47 per cent.
SCH ED U L E J ---- F L A X , ETC.
In like manner the difference in the cost of labor in the pro
duction of flax, hemp, and jute goods is 7 per cent. The sched
ule is 44 per cent.
The Senator from Montana, another one of the able de
fendants o f this totally indefensible bill, with its monopoly-pro
tecting schedules, thought it a sufficient answer to suggest that
tlxe Senator from Oklahoma could not expect to be furnished
with intelligence.
Mr. President, I invite the defenders of this bill to put upon
the face of the C o n g r e s s i o n a l R ecord an answer to these tables
which I have submitted, showing the relative labor cost of our
manufactures and the gross disparity of the schedules they
submit in comparison with the lower rates which would prop
erly measure the difference in the cost o f production at home
and abroad.
The proponents of these schedules, in my opinion, can not an
swer my objections without putting themselves to utter confu
sion, if they answer in a spirit of perfect moral and intellectual
integrity and frankness, because it contains a multitude of items
which are practically prohibitive, which produce no revenue
worth mentioning, and has resulted necessarily in the exclusion
of foreign competition, followed by combinations in restraint of
trade and the establishment of monopoly prices—charging the
people too much for what they buy from monopoly and paying
them too little for what they sell to monopoly. This is why the
Republican organization pledged itself to revise the tariff and
made the people believe it would be a downward revision.
I give a table of examples of these prohibitive duties, to
gether with the paragraph of the bill, duty, the revenue, and
the table from which the information is drawn.
These are but a few of the items which might be multiplied
indefinitely.
E x h ib it 14.
SC H E D U L E K -----W O O L, ETC.
It should be remembered that in products of wholesale inter
national use our imports may be prevented by a small tax where
it makes the imports unprofitable, so that the prohibitive rates
which average just high enough to prevent competition, as shown
SC H E D U L E L-----S I L K , ETC.
Silk and silk goods: The difference in labor cost o f produc by the table below, serve as a great check to international
tion is 10 per cent, but the proposed tariff is 60 per cent, so as commerce and lower the amount o f revenue which we ought
to receive under a system of liberal imports and exports.
to insure a monopoly.
The trivial reductions claimed to liave been made by the
S C H E D U L E M ---- P A P E R , ETC.
Senate bill as amended are o f no consequence, because the
Pulp, paper, and books: In this schedule the difference in the rates lowered were so far above the prohibitive point that lower
labor cost o f production at home and abroad is between 11 and ing the rates leaves them still prohibitive and reminds me of
12 per cent. The tariff schedule is 21 per cent.
the quotation of my colleague from Macbeth:
The difference in the cost of production measured by labor in
this country and abroad is about 8 per cent. The tariff is 58
per cent.
Then be these juggling fiends no more believed,
W ho palter with us in a double sense,
Who keep the word of promise to our ear,
And break it to our hope.
SC H E D U L E N ---- SU N D R IE S.
And. finally, in sundries the difference o f labor cost in this
country and abroad is 9 per cent, while the Committee on
Finance imposed an equivalent ad valorem o f 23 per cent.
I challenge the chairman o f the Committee on Finance to
answer this exhibit, and invite him to use all o f his experts,
and to put on the pages of the C o n g r e s s io n a l , R ecord his an
swer, where it may be critically examined by the scholars of the
country.
I charge him before the country and before the eyes o f civil
ized mankind with writing these schedules, under the pretense
of protecting the American workingman, far above the total
cost o f the labor in the gross product, which would not be justi
fied even if the percentage o f labor cost in similar articles
abroad was absolutely nothing. But granted that the labor
cost abroad is one-half what it is in the United States, I put in
this table the maximum average rate, thus measuring the differ
ence in the cost of production at home and abroad, and call the
attention of the country to it.
The defense o f these monopoly protecting schedules has been
as remarkable as the schedules themselves. To my inquiry as
to why the rates were not adjusted to the difference in the cost
o f production at home and abroad, the first defense was that
o f the Senator from New Hampshire, that the inquiry as to
what was the difference in the cost of production at home and
abroad was absurd.
Mr. President, I have demonstrated that the answer of the
Senator from New Hampshire is itself absurd, if it were offered,
in perfect good faith, as I am sure it was.
The next answer would appear to come from the Senator from
Massachusetts, who, having explained a question I did not ask,
saw fit to suggest he could not give the Senator from Oklahoma
the understanding with which to comprehend, and when I suc
ceeded in enabling him to understand my question he confessed
that he was not prepared to answer it.
The Senator from Rhode Island, the chairman o f the Com
mittee on Finance, whose genuine good temper at least I always
admire, suggested as a proper answer to my inquiry that I was
“ new to the Senate,” a polite way o f suggesting a lack of learn
ing and understanding which is commonly practiced by the
managers of the committee on committees when they can not
answer intelligently an embarrassing question,
89032— 8445
T A X IN G
RA W
M A T E R IA L S
IN J U R IO U S TO A M E R IC A N
N A T IO N A L CO M M ERCE .
M A N U FA CTU RER S
AND
Mr. President, when we tax by the tariff the materials needed
by our manufacturers, whether such materials are raw mate
rials or partly in the process of manufacture, we put our
American manufacturers at a serious disadvantage in competing
with foreign manufacturers in the markets of the United States
and obstruct our own commercial expansion.
Foreign countries provide their manufacturers in large de
gree with free raw material, and therefore with cheaper mate
rials needed for manufacture. Foreign manufacturers have,
therefore, this advantage over our manufacturers in competing
for the markets. Taxing raw materials used by our manufac
turers will, for this reason, limit our foreign exports o f manu
factured goods. This means limiting the production o f Ameri
can factories. This means restricting the number o f our work
men, lessening the demand for their labor, lowering their
wages; and, what is more, means also a smaller output and a
consequent greater cost to the consumer (over and above the
increased cost imposed by higher raw materials), for the reason
that the greater the output the more economic the production.
Cheaper material means a greater foreign market for Amer
ican productions; it means increased demand for A m e r ic a n
labor; it means higher wages for American labor; and it m e a n s
cheaper prices for American consumers, always believing, as. I
believe, that the artificial prices now fixed by monopoly will be
in due season abated.
American manufacturers are at a further disadvantage be
cause they sell to foreigners the goods needed in more advanced
manufactures cheaper than they do to each other icithin our
oicn borders. Because o f this, millions o f capital created by
American labor is going abroad to get the advantage o f these
cheaper prices and to employ, not American workmen, but for
eign workmen. (See North’s report.)
ANT
OBSTRUCTION TO COMMERCE L IM IT S T H E OPPORTUNITIES FOR
LEGITIM ATE EM PLOYM ENT OF BOTH CAPITAL AND LABOR.
TH B
Mr. President, it is perfectly obvious, that having provided
a tariff high enough to equal “ the difference in the cost of
production at home and abroad,” so as to put our manufacturers
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
on a perfect level with the manufacturers of foreign lands in
the cost of production, that any further tax upon our imports or
our exports, or upon their imports or exports is merely a bar
rier to a free interchange of commerce, limiting both our com
merce and their commerce.
There is a very important factor in commerce separate and
apart from the question of equality of cost. We import woolen
goods, cotton goods, silk goods, and we export goods o f the
same material to the very countries from which we import such
goods. The factor entering into this proposition is not one of
cold economy alone, for it obviously would be more economical
to buy our woolen goods in our own country and save the dif
ference of freight and the same thing would be true for the
Europeans— that it would be better for them to keep their goods
at home from a standpoint purely of economy.
But the question of economy is not the only factor controlling
or guiding exports and imports. It is a question of taste and
of personal fancy that causes Americans to buy French. Scotch,
or English goods, and which causes the Scotch, English, and
French to buy American goods. We enlarge their markets by
buying their stuff. They enlarge our markets by buying our
stuff. We increase the demand for their labor; they increase
the demand for our labor; and we export no more than we import,
for the volume o f our exports is determined by the volume o f our
imports (using these terms to cover credits and expenditures).
VO LU M E OF E X P O R T S CONTROLLED BY VO LU M E OF IM P O R T S.
%
This question can be reduced to a mathematical demonstra
tion, properly interpreted. It is only necessary to take the
unit o f the export or o f the import to determine this question.
When the American exports $100,000 worth o f goods in any
form, whether in cotton bales or in cotton cloth, he receives
from his foreign customer a hundred thousand dollars in money,
or credit, which he may convert at his will into cash or into
goods, and his export will be balanced with an import or its
mercantile equivalent in cash, in credit, or expenditure abroad,
or with work performed, as in carrying freights, and so forth.
A vast multitude of such transactions do not alter this sub
stantial truth. It merely enlarges and emphasizes it, and it
may be taken as a sound commercial maxim that our exports
are balanced by our imports and our imports are balanced by
our exports, and when we obstruct our imports we obstruct our
exports, and thereby diminish the world’s demand for the goods
of our manufacturers; we thereby diminish the world’s demand
for the products of American labor; we thereby diminish the
demand for American labor; we thereby diminish the employ
ment of American labor and lower the wages of American labor.
BALAN CE OF TRADE.
[Giffen Essays in Finance, 161.]
Tables showing the balance of trade are apt to mislead men.
For example, our statistics will exhibit in one column our im
ports, in another column our exports, and the balance is called
the “ balance of trade.” If we have exports more than we have
imports in these tables the balance of trade is said to be in our
favor.
This conclusion o f the balance being in our favor is unmiti
gated nonsense. Whenever we ship goods from the United
States we get what our citizens regard as the equivalent, in
cash, credits, or other property.
He who attempts to draw any conclusion whatever as to a nation’s
Wealth or poverty from the mere fact of a favorable or unfavorable
balance of trade has not grasped the first fundamental principle of
Political economy.
(II. T. Ely, Problems of To-day, p. 2 8 .)
The plain truth is our statistics, showing merely “ exports ”
and “ imports,” do not and can not take into account our
credits abroad or the credits o f foreigners in the United States.
They do not and they can not take into account the payment by
the United States of exceeding $100,000,000 annually for ocean
going freight and passengers carried exclusively in foreign bot
toms. These tables can not take into account expenditures of
tuiiaens o f the United States abroad, which probably exceed
$100,000,000 per annum.
These tables do not take into account millions of dollars
shipped abroad by foreigners working in the United States.
These tables do not take into account numerous foreign in
vestments made by citizens of the United States in foreign
lands and by foreigners in our land.
These tables do not take into account even the transfer of
great estates from the United States abroad by international
marriages.
The plain truth, which can not be disputed without stultifi
cation, is this, that for every export we receive its equivalent
In cash or credit, and for every import we pay in cash or credit.
The available gold in the world, which is the basis o f what we
call “ cash,” is a comparatively small amount. The total gold
in the United States amounted to one thousand five hundred
8 0 0 3 2 — 8445
39
and ninety-three millions December 31, 1906. (Statistical Ab
stract of the United States, 1907, pp. 742.)
The annual production of gold in the world amounted to four
hundred millions in 1906. Germany had over a thousand mil
lions in gold, and France about a thousand millions in gold, and
the British Empire about a thousand millions in gold in 1906,
and all of the gold money on earth combined did not exceed
seven billions.
No thoughtful man will pretend that we can pursue a policy
by which our exports would be paid in gold and not paid in the
goods and credits and properties of foreign countries. It can
therefore be taken as true that our exports are paid for by im
ports, and that when we limit our imports we limit our exports
and our national commerce under a laic as fixed as the law of
gravitation.
Mr. President, the Senator from New Hampshire made a
single defense with regard to these schedules which I desire
to answer, and it is the only defense, outside of that of the
chairman, so far as I have observed in the R ecord , that I re
gard as meeting the matter in any degree, and that is the state
ment, in effect, that by lowering these schedules we would in
vite into this country the imports of other countries, which
would throw out of employment our own laborers.
This theory, Mr. President, is not sustained by the theory
o f economic teaching which shows that inevitably exports are
always paid for by imports and imports are paid for by ex
ports. If we examine into the individual transactions of which
the aggregate is composed, we will observe that when any
American ships abroad any export, whether it be cotton or
cotton goods of any kind, he is immediately paid in cash or
cash credits or its equivalent, and therefore there comes back
to the United States the immediate equivalent of that which
the American exports. That individual export is instantly
balanced. Since the whole must be composed of its several
parts, it follows that exports are paid for by imports and im
ports are paid for by exports, and when we reduce the tariff
and invite into our country foreign exports in effect we stimu
late American industries; we enlarge the productive power
o f the American fa ctory; we increase the demand for labor
and the employment of capital; and we put ourselves in the
attitude o f shipping abroad more things than we now ship and
enlarging both our exports and imports in like volume. I think
the reason why our imports and our exports compare so un
favorably with the other nations of the earth is largely because
we have followed the Chinese method of excluding, in large
measure, the products o f other lands.
I wish to call attention to our status as to imports and ex
ports per capita.
C O M P AR ISO N OF T H E
CO M M ERCE OF T H E U N ITE D
CO U N T R IE S.
S T A T E S AND O TH E R
We plume ourselves on our tremendous commerce in exports
and imports when, in point o f fact, our rank among other
nations of the world in the quantity of our foreign commerce per
capita is entirely discreditable to us. In the quantity of our
exports and imports we rank far inferior to every highly civi
lized country in Europe, as the following table will exhibit,
taken from the Statistical Abstract of the United States for
1907, page 73S:
impor-ts and exports per capita of countries, 1906.
Country.
Sweden------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imports.
17. S
O
34.87
70.23
53.77
93.90
45.08
22.53
21.25
02.31
64.82
25.86
2S.05
184.3(5
36.22
29.23
81.97
68.45
21.13
Exports.
22.10
54.87
85.70
79.70
75.30
39.84
29.25
29.89
66.06
55.55
24.77
22.56
143.01
21.91
22.93
59.97
42.49
38.34
The imports of the German Empire, of France, United King
dom of the Netherlands, of Norway and Sweden, of Switzer
land, exceed their exports by hundreds of millions, but the ex
ports of Siam, Egypt, Peru, British Indies, Haiti, Cuba, Mexico,
Russia, Santo Domingo, and the Congo have their exports ex
ceeding their imports, and we are not in a good class if civiliza
tion and intelligence are considered.
40
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
We are in the activity of our foreign commerce, however, de
cidedly ahead of the Congo Free State, Persia, Peru, Paraguay,
India, Siam, and Turkey. Our country can feel but little pride
in the school of political economy, if organized blind greed can
be called a school of political economy, controlling the United
States and its pitiful comparison with the foreign output of
the other intelligent nations of the world. Let us at least equal
Great Britain, which has learned the economic truth that pro
hibitive tariffs obstruct and do not promote commerce, and let
us act upon that policy, retaining our tariff for revenue, high
enough for honest incidental protection and no higher.
Our patriotic citizenship has been grossly misled by the
leaders of the party in power as to our comparative commercial
activities.
The growth of our exports and imports show a small relative
increase:
Our total im ports:
1881______________
1 8 9 0 ______________
1 9 0 0 ______________
1 907______________
Our total exp o rts:
1 881______________
1 8 9 0______________
1900______________
1 9 0 7 ______________
Population in—
1881______________
1 8 9 0 ______________
1 9 0 0 ______________
1907 (estimated)
6 5 0 ,0 0 0 ,
773, 000,
830, 000,
1, 415, 000,
000
000
000
000
883,
845,
1. 370,
1, 853,
000
000
000
000
000,
000,
000,
000,
58, 000, 000
62, 000, 000
75, 000, 000
88 , 000, 000
It will be seen from these tables that notwithstanding the
tremendous improvement in modern machinery and the in
creased output from that source, and the wonderful growth of
seagoing vessels and their freight-carrying capacity, our exports
and imports have about doubled in twenty-six years and have
not increased much faster than our population. This is a dis
creditable showing to the intelligence of the American people.
It will thus be seen, Mr. President, that our exports and im
ports are small compared to the exports and imports o f na
tions whom we have been taught to believe inferior to us; but
in the building o f a nation we are ourselves vast consumers of
our own products, and this must stand to our credit.
It will also be seen that our exports and imports have not
grown in the last quarter o f a century much more rapidly than
our population, which shows in fact that we have not kept pace
in foreign exports with the enormous productive capacity of
modem machinery and invention.
These are facts worthy o f consideration, which tend to show
the natural consequences o f obstructing our imports by pro
hibitive taxes, by vexatious and difficult regulations; and the
present bill is peculiarly unwise because instead o f providing a
substantial reduction on the prohibitive tariff rates and re
moving the obstructions to our commerce it has utterly failed
to do so. On the contrary, it has increased many items and
the average of all items, and the crowning absurdity is offered
in proposing to penalize foreign countries, who are already
largely excluded from our markets, by threatening them with a
25 per cent advance on rates now largely prohibitive unless
they promptly remove within the year the tariff obstructions
which are obnoxious to us, and thus we invite the retaliation of
the nations of all the world. Nations are composed of individ
uals, and the law of human nature which governs the individual
will govern nations to a substantial degree.
OUR NATIONAL PROSPERITY IS NOT DUE TO A PRO
HIBITIVE TARIFF, BUT IN SPITE OF IT.
Mr. President, it has been a common practice for the advo
cates o f the high tariff to claim that the prosperity of the people
o f the United States and the employment of its people is due to
the so-called “ protective tariff; ” nothing could be more utterly
fallacious.
Modern prosperity is due to the dissemination of human
knowledge through Ihe.pri.uliug jji'ess. inventionii o f labor-saving
machinery, hundreds of thousands o f inventions under the re
ward o f personal patents granted by the United States, granted
by Great Britain, by Germany, by France, by Norway and Swe
den, by Italy, by Japan, by every civilized country in the world.
The United States has granted over 900,000 different patents
covering art in manufacture, but the art to which we are chiefly
indebted for our modern prosperity is the development o f paper
making and the printing presses, by which the learning and
the knowledge of all men is made the common property of every
man and enriched him beyond all computation.
Out of these inventions have sprung the incredibly cheap
manufacture of cloth and fabrics of every description; o f metals
in a multitude o f forms, from Bessemer steel to the Waterbury
watch, made by machinery and distributed to man at an in
89032— 8445
credibly cheap price. The telegraph, the telephone, the modern
railway, the mail service, and every agency of civilization
have been brought into service by the wonderful increase
o f the intelligence of man. China has just completed its
first railway built by Chinese engineers and workmen, and soon
will be the joint heir of the wonderful increase in human
knowledge.
All of the nations of the world prosper in this magnificent
development o f the human race, due to the increased intelli
gence o f man, due to modern processes, springing chiefly, and
above all, from the great invention of Gutenberg.
Mr. President, not long since I stood upon the banks of the
Niagara River. Down the canal below the great falls I saw
a great wood yard, and saw two men passing pieces o f wood
to an endless belt. I followed it down the bluff nearly 200 feet;
below a giant penstock of 7 feet in diameter delivered a col
umn of water upon a turbine wheel developing over 1,000 horse
power, which caused to spin with lightning speed French burr
wheels, against which these pieces of wood were placed and
pressed by hydraulic pressure.
They melted almost instantly, and the macerated fiber by
an endless belt, passing immediately to the paper factory on
top of the bluff, was automatically delivered into a circular vat
with moving arms; adjacent was a man engaged in putting
into this vat sizing; the prepared mixture was fed upon an
endless belt, porous—the water dripped through, the sheet of
wet paper emerged, passing through a series of rolls, the last
ones heated by steam, and at the end of the comparatively small
room the material which a few minutes before had been logs of
wood appeared as rolls of news paper ready for the Hoe press.
At Herald square, New York, I saw these same rolls being
fed like lightning into giant printing presses and emerging a
modem newspaper, a miracle o f design; hundreds of thousands
o f copies turned out in a few short hours, full of learning,
literature, art, full of business, full of wit and humor, full of
the news of the whole world gathered together by the ablest men
with the aid o f the telephone and telegraph; filled with beautiful
illustrations and photographs o f everything conceivable.
Mr. President, where is the advocate of the prohibitive tariff
so lacking in common sense or intellectual integrity that he will
assert that these great advances of the human race, which are
common to all the civilized nations, whether they have or
whether they have not a protective tariff, nevertheless enjoy
all of these things. Let those who believe that these things are
due to the protective tariff support this bill and applaud it.
But those that see that these things are due to the development
of the human race and to the providence o f God can be misled
by no such shallow sophistry.
Mr. President, England has been very prosperous; she is the
mistress of the seas; the sun never sets upon her dominions;
her wealth is enormous. The prosperity of England is not due
to the protective tariff, but to the policy of the greatest freedom
of international commerce.
France and Germany have the protective tariff and are like
wise prosperous, but they are prosperous in spite of the pro
tective tariff and not because of it. The prosperity of the
whole world is due to the increasing intelligence of the human
race, its mastery over the forces of nature, its substitution of
machinery for the labor o f man.
“ Protectionists justly contend that the high tariff of 1897 has
not ruined the foreign trade of the United States, which on both
its import and export sides has exhibited a great advance.”
Undoubtedly this contention is true, but the obstructions inter
posed in commerce has not served to make the imports and
exports o f the United States contrast favorably with the ex
ports and imports o f other nations. The imports and exports of
the United States do not compare favorably with those of the
civilized nations of the world, as I have already shown.
One thing should be settled for all time, and that is such
prosperity as we have can not be due to the artificial obstruc
""•■■■ - *•
tion o f our Intel national commerce. ....... .
HOW T H E PRESEN T SYSTEM
W A S E S T A B L IS H E D .
It would seem incredible that the monopoly engendering
policy could be established and persisted in against the will of
the people, and I shall endeavor to show how this has occurred
and its proper remedy.
In 1856 both parties were agreed on a low revenue-producing
tariff. For fifteen year everybody had been content with the low
Walker tariff o f 1846. The exigency of the civil war required a
high tariff for the extra revenues demanded at that time.
Like all tariffs this Morrill tariff o f 1861 raised the prices on
the consumer and gave the American manufacturer a special
opportunity to make money at the expense o f the consumer.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
When the war was over the question of lowering the tariff
begun to be considered.
The Protective Tariff League was thereupon organized,
with far-reaching 'affiliations, powerful press agencies, with
an educational bureau which instructed every boy who ap
proached the voting age throughout the United States in the
sophistry of a high tariff, appealing to his patriotism to
stand by American labor. This policy has had abundant
success, but it could not have succeeded except for the political
changes in party administration which had taken place prior
to the war.
This change to which I refer was the transfer of the power
directly from the people through the agencies of precinct con
ventions, nominating delegates to county conventions, county
conventions composed of delegated delegates to select delegates
for the state convention, state conventions composed of dele
gates delegated by delegated delegates.
These political functionaries were thrice removed from the
People, the state delegates being delegated by county delegates,
the county delegates being delegated by precinct delegates,
and the precinct delegates probably delegated by the local rep
resentatives of what is known as the “ machine politician ” and
bis petty circle.
In machine politics the precinct manager will call a primary
at some place convenient for his control and probably inconven
ient for the attendance of the people. He will notify his strikers
hi advance and be sure of a sufficient number to put through a
slate and plan agreed upon. In this manner the machine can
evade a wholesome public opinion and manipulate the delegates
to the county convention, and with this machine county conven
tion a machine state convention is assured.
In this manner any person having an important material in
terest to serve, such as establishing or maintaining a policy of
government, permitting some people to tax other people for their
benefit, have a political opportunity.
All that the Protective Tariff League and its commercial and
Political allies had to do under this system of government
Was to have a proper bureau established, see to it that repreaentatlves of the system were in place to manage the machine
Politics; and in this way they have been able to control
dominating conventions—county, State, and national—and the
will of the great body of the people could not make itself
freely felt, being unorganized and not clearly realizing the
manner in which the monopoly-producing system was taxing
them.
The Protective Tariff League and the representatives of
^offish commercial interests, the beneficiaries o f the manipula
tions of our statutes, have intertwined and interwoven them
selves with the organization of the Republican party in such a
Planner as to be inextricable. They have successfully appealed
to the well-known patriotism of the great body of Republican
aitizens and skillfully trained them to believe as true, thiugs
which were not true in fact, and were sophistical in reason and
unsound in conclusion. This process has gone on until it has
become impossible to separate the political and patriotic impulse
from the commercial, so that men of high character and upright
Purposes find themselves used against their will and are more
often used in total unconsciousness of the fact that they are
being used by commercial interests under the color of patriotisin and party pride. The machine method o f politics is a bad
Method and ought to be abated.
BO TH
P A R T IE S
HAVE
BEEN
AFFECTED
BY
T H IS
nominate and elect his representative in county, State, and Na
tion, and to establish an “ initiative and referendum,” with its
salutary check on the representatives of the people.
Machine politics glorifies organization and forgets that the
best safeguard of society is to allow the actual sentiment of
the majority of the people having appreciable education to rule
and not take that power out of their hands by clever machine
manipulation.
When we follow delegation of power from the citizen to the
primary delegate, from the primary delegate to the county
delegate, from the county delegate to the nominee for the
legislature, from the member of the legislature to the United
States Senate, a Senator chosen in this manner is four degrees
removed from the people.
Through machine politics selfish interests can exercise an
undue influence in our parties and in our administration of
government. I can not but feel that the influences of mo
nopoly in this country are in present control; that this bill is
written to serve their purposes; to make the rich richer
and the poor poorer; to benefit the few at the expense of the
many.
In making this comment I do so with the profound convic
tion that this condition can not be greatly prolonged, but that
the American people will in a short time cause the laws to be
so amended as to promote the greatest of all modern needs—
the more equitable distribution of the proceeds of human labor.
E V IL .
It is this method which sometimes sends to the Senate of the
United States representatives who would not be the choice of
*be people at a popular election.
It is natural therefore that the election o f Senators by direct
vote, or the nomination o f Senators by direct vote should not
oe approved by those who have been or might expect to be in
debted to machine politics hereafter for their own preferment
It w a s a recogn ition o f th is abuse, which has grow n up in
our country, that led the Democratic party at Denver, which.
I freely confess, is not entirely purged of this evil o f machine
politics, to put the query to the people of the United States,
Shall the people rule?
The true remedy for this condition is not by an iuconsequen
tial debate with the chairman o f the Committee on Finance,
who has spent months and years over these schedules without
ever touching the only question of importance, to wit, the d if
ference in the cost of the production at home and abroad, but
it is to be found by reducing the political machine to innocuous
desuetude and the restoration of the people’s rules by the di
rect primary, allowing each citizen, regardless of party, to
89032— 8445--------6
41
o
Ill fares the land to hastening ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates and men decay.
Mr. President, I do not desire to detain the Senate longer. I
have taken some pains to show that in the protected industries
the labor of the country is not paid as well as in the unprotected
industries; that labor has continued to receive a diminishing
part of the proceeds o f labor; that labor has not received a
fair share of its own product. I have undertaken to show how
labor was naturally oppressed by the upbuilding of gigantic
monopolies in this country, whose policy was to close up fac
tories, to pay labor as small a wage as possible, to raise prices,
and to limit the output; to tax the people as high as they
thought the “ traffic would bear,” and to control their wageearners, both commercially and politically. That is a very
natural thing for them to do. They are not greatly to blame if
the law permit. The lawmaker is greatly to blame if the law
continues to permit.
But I have also demonstrated that our census shows, in the
most overwhelming and convincing manner, that this bill has
paid no attention whatever to “ the difference in cost of pro
duction at home and abroad; ” that that difference, even if the
foreign manufacturer paid nothing whatever for his labor,
could not exceed nineteen and a fraction per cent for pure pro
tective purposes, while many of the rates in this bill exceed 100
per cent. Having shown this, having pointed out what the
effect has been upon the wages and general conditions of labor
and upon the mortality of human life under this system of gov
ernment which we have been following; having submitted the
suggestions for the amendment of these conditions, in the hope
that perhaps in the future they may be of some use to future
students of these questions, I am done.
I have called attention to the policy of New Zealand, which
protects human life first, which has controlled monopoly, in
order that the poorer and the weaker elements of society may
have a better opportunity to live. I have called attention to
what the necessary result is o f gigantic fortunes piling up until
the fortune of a single individual will reach nearly a thousand
millions; that its only effect upon this country must be to
absorb all of the transportation and transmission companies,
all the coal mines, all of the purchaseable lumber and ores, all
of the purcliaseahle real estate, all of the things visible and in
visible desired by men and generally grouped together and called
the “ opportunities of life.”
There can b e b u t one result, and the Senate is in honor
bound to consider this and to find a way to control it and cor
rect it. in order to protect the children and the women, as well
as the men of this country.
I can do nothing more than appeal to the Senate and to call
their attention to their responsibility in this matter. Having
done so. I have discharged the only duty which it is possible for
me to discharge. I have given many days of hard labor to this
question, and of unremitting industry, in a desire to place
upon this record the truth, and nothing but the truth, in
the hoi>e that it might appeal to the leaders of the Senate, and,
if it did not, that it might appeal to the people of the United
States.
1
the
the
X
X
tan
for
ide;
by
tho
in i
I ft
tax
to 1
puipon
mul
stiti
com
and
I
men
T
will
horn
T
Sn
In
any
will,
any
antic
of si
U8 ,p
Unit'
gran
sions
ule, i
shall
dutie
$300,
tweei
000,
upon
$1,00
''ent,
tiona
such
such
incre:
“P
anee
a del It
desce
"L
aunts
paren
“ P!
any r
consii
by th
hovve1
if it
there’
i rans
vious
trails
“ Pi
religii
or ini
.. T
prope
the d'
0 per
therei
0
Tlio Tariff— Inheritance Tax.
“ The Secretary of the T ’-easury is authorized and directed to submit
to Congress rules and regulations for the collection of the same for
further congressional action.”
S P E E CH
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, the Finance Committee has struck
out the inheritance-tax provision of the House of Representa
tives. It should have been heavily increased and made pro
gressive on the swollen fortunes of the country. The most
OF O K L A H O M A ,
important need of the people of the United States of this genera
tion requires the abatement of the gigantic fortunes being piled
In t h e S e n a t e o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s ,
up by successful monopoly, by successful stock jobbing, by skill
Tuesday, June 29, 1909.
ful appropriation under the protection of the law of all the oppor
The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, having under consideration
tunities of life, and which have brought about a grossly inequi
the bill (H . R. 1438) to provide revenue, equalize duties, and encourage
table distribution of the proceeds of human labor and of the
the industries of the United States, and for other purposes—
values created by the activities o f men.
Mr. OWEN said:
I have framed this provision for the express purpose of pro
Mr. P r e s id e n t : I do not agree with the Senator from Mon posing a readjustment in the distribution of wealth in this coun
tana TMr. D i x o n ] that the psychological moment is at hand try in a manner which will restore to the people who have
for the adoption of the inheritance tax. I have not the slightest created these values the gigantic sums appropriated either byidea that there is any probability of the programme laid down fraud or by the permission and the assistance of the law itself.
by the committee being changed in any respect. But I am in
d is t r ib u t io n o f w e a l t h .
thorough accord with the view o f the Senator from Montana
Mr. President, I have heretofore shown to the Senate in a
in regard to the wisdom and propriety of an inheritance tax.
I favor, equally, the income tax. But I regard the inheritance manner most conclusive that the very great part of all of the
tax as a matter of far greater importance, and that it ought wealth of this country has already passed into the hands of
to be added to our permanent fiscal system, not only for the less than 10 per cent, and over half of the national wealth into
purpose of raising revenue, but for the further and more im the hands of less than 1 per cent of the people. (P. 3403, Con
portant purpose o f abating the increasing danger of the accu g r e s s i o n a l R ecor d , June 16.)
Spahrs’s table for the distribution of wealth in the United
mulation of fortunes swollen beyond all reason, which now con
stitute a menace to the stability of our finance and of our States, taken from his work, “ The Present Distribution of
commerce and to the liberties o f the people o f the United States Wealth in the United States,” when our national wealth was
$6 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 , is as follows:
and of the civilized world.
I suggest to the Senate a progressive inheritance-tax amend
Per
Average
Aggregate
Per
Class.
Families. cent.
wealth.
ment, which I ask the Secretary to read.
wealth.
cent.
The VICE-PRESIDENT. Without objection, the Secretary
1.0 $263,040 $32,880,000,000
125,000
54.8
will read the amendment proposed by the Senator from Okla
10.9
14,180
1.362.500
19,320,000,000
32.2
homa.
1,639
7,800,000,000
38.1
13.0
4.762.500
50.0
6,250,000
The Secretary read as follows:
OF
I I ON. E G B E R T
L. 0 WEN,
PRO G R ESSIVE IN H E R IT A N C E TAX A M E N D M E N T .
Suggested to the Senate by Mr. O w e n .
In lieu of sections 34 and 35. insert the follow ing:
" A legacy duty shall be and Is hereby imposed upon the transfer of
any right, title, and interest in or to any property, real or personal, by
will, grunt, or transfer in any manner, or under the Intestate law of
ai*y State or Territory, or of the United States, from any person In
anticipation of death, or of any person dying, who is seized or possessed
of such property while a resident of the United States, or of any of
us possessions; or when the property of such decedent lies within the
United States, or within any of its possessions, and the decedent or
krantor was a nonresident of the United States, or of any of its possessions, at the time of his death, in accordance with the following sched
ule. to w i t :
“ Where the clear value of the entire estate is less than $100,000 it
■hall be exempt from legacy duty, otherwise, subject to the following
’
d»tles, to w i t :
. ” Where the clear value of the entire estate is between $100,000 and
*300,000, 1 per c e n t; between $300,000 and $500,000. 2 per c e n t: be
tween $500,000 and $600,000, 3 per c e n t; between $600,000 and $700,mo, 4 per c e n t; between $700,000 and $ 1 ,000,000, 5 per c e n t; and
every excess in the clear value of such estate over and above
*1,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 there shall be automatically added in addition to 5 per
a pd accumulative as to each additional increase, 1 per cent aadi
nonal legacy duty to be laid upon each increase in the clear value of
£8tate ° f $1,000,000. or the major fractional part thereof, until
■uch duty reaches 100 per cent cumulative duty upon such additional
increase in the clear value of such estate.
‘Provided, That when such estate, by will, devise, grant, or inheritaoee iaw goes t0 c° b ateral kin, there shall be imposed the following
additional legacy duty upon such portion only of such estate as may
descend to such persons severally, to w i t :
" Brothers and sisters, or their descendants, 3 per c e n t; uncles and
aunts, or their descendants, 5 per c e n t; other persons, not children or
parents, 10 per cent.
“ Provided, That any property conveyed, in anticipation of death, by
any person, as a gift or grant to the extent conveyed without adequate
consideration, where such estate would come within the rule imposed
by this act, fixing such legacy duties, such conveyance, gift, or transfer,
however made, shall lie subject to the legacy duty herein provided, as
if it were the estate of a decedent, and the estate shall be chargeable
therewith unless otherwise paid. Where corporate stocks or bonds are
transferred or placed under a trust for transfer within five rears pre
vious to death, as a gift, either in whole or in part, to that extent such
transfer shall be conclusive evidence of its character as a legacy.
“ Provided, however, That property devised or bequeathed to any
religious, educations, patriotic, charitable, or benevolent corporation
or Institution shall ae exempt from legacy duty.
“ The legacy duty hereby imposed shall be a Hen and charge upon the
property of every person who may die as aforesaid, from the date of
the death of such person, and shall be payable within one year, bearing
6 per cent from tae date of the death for the first twelve months, and
thereafter at the '•ate of 10 per cent until fully paid.
088— 8491
Total-------- ------------- __ 13,500,000
100.0
4,800
60,000.000,000
100.0
The inequalities have been steadily growing worse, and when
a single person’s fortune is estimated at a thousand millions
and is gathering in $50,000,000 per annum of the net proceeds
of the products of the labor of this country, while millions of
human beings can not lay aside $50 apiece per annum, what
must be the inevitable result? It is this condition, half under
stood, that is developing rapidly a sentiment of radical social
ism, discontent, and social unrest.
Moody’s Manual of 1907. page 30, presents a “ General Sum
m ary” of corporations offering stocks and bonds for sale to
the stock exchanges and recorded by him in great detail in a
volume of nearly 3.000 pages, as follows:
Total stocks and bonds.
Steam railroad division__________________________________ $15, 436, 758, 000
Public Utilities d iv ision __________________________________
8 ,1 3 0 ,4 6 4 ,0 0 0
Industrial division____________________________________
Mining d iv isio n ___________________________________________
1 0 ,1 5 6 ,3 3 3 ,0 0 0
2, 525, 173, 000
36, 248, 668, 000
In addition to this enormous volume of corporate wealth,
which comprises a registered one-third of our national wealth,
there is an unregistered volume of corporations which are close
corporations which do not sell stock, which are personal cor
porations, amounting to thousands of millions of dollars.
I respectfully call your attention to the Statistical Abstract
of 1907. Table 244, which sets forth the wealth of the United
States, which shows clearly where its approximate ownership
may be found, to w it:
T a b le 2U, S ta tis tica l A b s tr a c t, 1907.
Real property--------------------------------------------------------------------Live stock--------------------------------------------------------------------------Farm implements and machinery______________________
Manufacturing machinery, tools, etc__________________
Railroad equipment— -----------------------------------------------------Street railway, shipping, waterworks__________________
Agricultural products___________________________________
Manufactured products_________________________________
Imported merchandise___________________________________
Mining products______________________________________a _ _
Clothing and personal ornaments______________________
Furniture, carriages_____________________________________
Total for United States
$62, 341, 492, 134
4, 073, 791, 736
844, 989. 863
3, 297, 754. 180
11, 244, 752, 000
4, 840, 546, 909
1, 899, 379, 652
7, 409, 291, 668
495, 543, 685
3 2 6 ,8 5 1 ,5 1 7
2, 000, 000. 000
5, 750, 000, 000
107, 104, 211, 917
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
2
Where do the city laborers under protection come in as joint
heirs of modern prosperity?
What part of this wealth created by labor is theirs?
They have no real estate, no live stock, farm machinery,
manufacturing machinery, railroads, or under any visible classi
fication. The only thing that they can have under this tabula
tion is clothing and a little personal property.
And yet the products of the labor in our specified manufactur
ing industries of 1905 reached a total of $14,802,147,087, for
5,470,321 wage-earners, whose product was therefore worth
$2,708 per capita.
These people received $2,611,540,532 in wages (Stat. Abst.
U. S., 1907, p. 144), or $479 per capita.
This $479 each must feed and shelter and clothe and educate
and provide leisure and the joyous participation in the common
providences of God for an average of three people, or about $16<>
each per annmn, or about an average of $13.33 per month.
There can hardly be much margin of saving under the circum
stances fo r sickness, ill health, accident, or loss of employment.
In New York City, with over four millions of people, less than
1 in 40 has any real estate.
we all agree is of the highest importance in developing human
beings.
T H E PLAN PRO PO SED IS L A W F U L .
Mr. President, the plan proposed is lawful and has been
passed upon by the Supreme Court of the United States in
Magoun v. Illinois Trust and Saving Bank (107 U. S., 283), in
which the court held that the inheritance-tax law of Illinois
makes a classification for taxation which the legislature had
power to make, and that the inlieritauce-tax law does not con
flict in any way with the provisions of the Constitution of the
United States.
The court in this case shows that these laws have been in
force in many of the States of the United States—Pennsyli vania, 1826; Maryland. 1844; Delaware, 1869; West Virginia,
1887; Connecticut. New Jersey, Ohio. Maine, Massachusetts,
1891 ; Minnesota, by constitutional provision.
The constitutionality of said taxes has been declared and the
i principles explained in many cases referred to in the case above
j mentioned. For example, in the United States v. Perkins (163
j U. S., 625), Klapp v. Mason (94 U. S., 589), United States r.
Fox (94 U. S., 315), Mager v. Grima (8 Howard, 490), and so
EN ORM OUS W E A L T H IN H E R IT E D BY A M AN’ S C H IL D R E N IS W O R T H L E S S IN I forth.
T H E H IG H E S T AND BEST SEN SE.
With the consent of the Senate, I submit a record of the inMr. President, it takes a human being of the first magnitude ; beritance tax of the British Empire, the German Empire, and of
to administer an estate of $10,000,000 with wisdom and effi the German Independent States: and, without objection, I will
ciency. No human being can protierly consume the income of print in the R ecord these tables without reading them.
such an estate, which, at 5 per cent, will make an income of
T H E PR A C T IC E S U ST A IN E D BY FOREIGN CO U N T R IE S.
$500,000 per annum, $1,366 per diem—about a hundred dollars
D. Max W est, in his work on Inheritance Tax, fully sets forth the
practice of every nation in this regard. I freelv quote from his work
an hour for every waking hour.
Since such vast sums of money can not be properly used by and call attention of the country to it.
England has adopted the progressive inheritance tax. reaching as far
the individual in the gratification of any just personal needs, and as 15 per cent on great estates.
Inheritance tax of the British Em pire:
since its possession frequently leads to the wildest extrava
In the finance act of 1804
and
chap.
gances, to the establishment of false standards of life, and often Ilarcourt simplified the system (57 death 58 Viet., removed30 ) Sir Vernon
of
duties,
the more glar
leads to harmful dissipation and vice, and sometimes even to ing anomalies, and greatly extended the application of the progressive
the corruption of our legislatures, of our administrative offices, principle. For the old probate, account, and estate duties he substi
tuted a
duty
according to
and of the judiciary itself in the crafty ways by which we all real and new estatefrom 1 graduatedcent, as followsthe size of the estate,
personal,
to 8 per
:
know human beings can be misled, a wise public policy should
When the principal value of the estate—
Exceeds £100 and does not exceed £300. 30 shillings.
establish a system of government which will restore to the
Exceeds £300 and does not exceed £500, 50 shillings.
people so much of the swollen fortunes developed by our mod
Exceeds £ 500 and does not exceed £ 1 .000. 2 per cent.
ern methods as justice demands.
Exceeds £ 1,000 and does not exceed £10,000. 3 per cent.
Exceeds £10,0 0 0 and does not exceed £ 2 5,000, 4 per cent.
No thoughtful student will deny that these gigantic fortunes
Exceeds £25,000 and does not exceed £50,000, 4 A per cent.
represent values created by the labors and the activities of our
Exceeds £ 50,000 and does not exceed £75.000, 5 per cent.
people. No man can deny the moral righteousness of restoring
Exceeds £ 75,000 and does not exceed £100.0 0 0 , 5 a per cent.
Exceeds £ 1 0 0.000 and does not exceed £ 150.000, 6 per cent.
to the people by legacy duty that which they have created and
Exceeds £1 5 0 ,0 0 0 and does not exceed £250.000, 6J per cent.
which has been taken from them under legal processes and by
Exceeds £250,000 and does not exceed £500,000. 7 per cent.
fair legal means, in the best view of the case, and by crafty,
Exceeds £ 5 0 0.000 and does not exceed £1,000 ,0 0 0 , i j per cent.
Exceeds £ 1 ,0 0 0,000, 8 per cent.
unfair, and illegal means, in the worst view of the case.
THE TAX
M O RA LLY AND E T H IC A L L Y J U S T .
It will do no harm to the legatees o f these swollen fortunes
to contribute to the State a reasonable percentage o f such
fortunes. They receive these fortunes as a gift, without effort,
without service, and are purely beneficiaries of a public legal
gratuity, which permits them to receive, without consideration,
vast sums by authority of a public statute.
It is true. Mr. President, that the usual inheritance statute
itself, based upon the obligation of the parent to provide for his
child, is thereby justified ; that the child, the wife, the dependents
have moral claim for support out of the proceeds of the labor,
self-sacrifice, ambition, or providence o f the parent; but these
considerations are abundantly recognized and provided for in
the amendment which I have the honor to submit. They are
more than provided fo r; they are left rich beyond every possible
desire or need of a well-ordered mind or a well-disposed heart,
We all agree that it would be unwise to remove or weaken
the incentive of an abundant reward as a compensation for the
great personal virtues of industry, providence, enterprise, selfsacrifice, and labor, and the proposed legacy duty will not remove a reasonable incentive, while it will put, perhaps, a check
»v h u
i u ambitioni not contenti with i tens ofd muttons, but
r s
i t t
r
e
greedily disposed to acquire hundreds of millions at the expense of a just distribution o f wealth. Common sense and
sound public policy demand that a fair incentive be not taken
away from the humbler citizens, who now. in vast numbers,
have not a sufficient supply of this world's goods to protect
themselves against an illness of thirty days, and from ivhom
every incentive of hope is removed except the pittance of a
meager daily bread.
While we should be considerate of the incentive to labor, in
dustry. providence, and self-sacrifice, on the part of strong and
powerful men, we should see to it that this incentive is not
taken away from millions of weaker men, or permit one man,
with the advantage of the accumulated millions drawn from
his ancestors, UNDER THE AUTHORITY AND PERMISSION
OF OUR LAWS, to appropriate all of the opportunities o f life,
and thus deprive millions o f feebler men of the incentive which
9S8—8491
By the finance act of 1007 the estate duty on estates exceeding
£150,0 0 0 was increased to the following scale:
When the principal value of the estate—
Exceeds £150,000
and does not
exceed
£250,000. 7
percent.
Exceeds £25 0 ,0 0 0
and does not
exceed
£ 500,000. 8
percent.
Exceeds £ 5 0 0,000
and does not
exceed
£750,000. !>
percent.
Exceeds £ 7 5 0,000
and does not
exceed
£ 1 .000.000. 10 per cent.
Exceeds £ 1 ,0 00,000 and does not exceed £1,500 ,0 0 0 , 10 per cent on the
first £1,000,000. 11 per cent on the remainder.
Exceeds £1.500.000 nnd does not exceed £2,000,000, 10 per cent on the
first £1,000.000, 12 per cent on the remainder.
Exceeds £2.000.000 and does not exceed £ 2 .500.000, 10 per cent on the
first £1,000.000. 13 per cent on the remainder.
Exceeds £2,5 0 0 ,0 0 0 and does not exceed £3.000.000, 10 per cent on the
first £ 1 .000.000, 14 per cent on the remainder.
Exceeds £3,000,000, 15 per cent on the remainder.
In addition to this estate duty, calculated on the value of the estate
as a whole, collateral heirs still have to pay legacy duty on their
j legacies or distributive shares of personal property, and succession duty
on the corresponding shares of real estate and on leaseholds, settled
personalty,
j legacy duty, and legacies charged on land, which are snotle subject to
according to the following consanguinity c a :
Per cent.
3
Brothers and sisters and their descendants-------------------------------------------j Uncles nnd aunts and their descendants------------------------------------------------5
Great uncles and great aunts and their descendants---------------------------0
i
' Other persons------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 10
a xim iiai sp
i T h e H erm an E m p ire h m p eria i in h eritastem ,taim p o sin g th e fo tio icln g till
n ce
x.
;
Per cent.
I Parents, brothers, and sisters, and their children---------------------------------4
|Grandparents and more distant ancestors, parents in-law and step
parents, children in law and stepchildren, grandnephews and
j grandnieces, illegitimate children acknowledged by the fathers
i and their offspring, adopted children and their offspring--------------6
Brothers and sisters of parents and relatives by marriage in the
second degree In collateral lines----------------------------------------------------------8
In other cases-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1°
The tax is progressive, the rates given above being Increased in the case
of inheritance over 2 0,000 marks by one tenth : for each further sum. at
first of 20 ,0 0 0 or 2 5.000 marks and afterwards of 50,000 or 100,000
marks
For amounts over 1,000,00*) marks the tax is levied at two and
one-half times the basic rates, making the maximum rate 25 per cent.
In the case of the immediate relatives, subject to the 4 per cent rate,
the progression applies only when the value of the inheritance is more
than 5 0,000 marks. On large amounts the German tax is considerably
heavier than the French, because the progressive rates apply to the
entire amount o f the inheritance, not merely to their respective frac
tions ; but when an inheritance is valued at a sum slightly in excess
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
of that to which a lower rate applies, the higher rate will be collected
only in so far as it can be paid out of half the amount by which the
inheritance exceeds the preceding class limit.
3
Besides this, the German independent States also have a progressive
inheritance tax, according to degree of consanguinity, as well as a pro
gressive rate.
Rates of German inheritance taxes in force January i , 19C6.
AlsaceAnhalt.
Lorraine.
Children____ _____________ _____
Other descendants...
Adopted children___ _____
____
Stepchildren_________________ _____ ____
Parents......... ................... ..
Grandparents, etc_____ ____
Stepparents.._____________ . . . .
Ohildren-in-1 aw .............................. ...................
Brothers and sisters____ ____ ____________
_______
Nephews and nieces_________
Uncles and aunts.................. . . . . ____ . .
Grandnephews, grandnieces_________ . .. .
Greatuneles, greataunts..............................
Cousins-german_________ _____ _____
Great-grandnephews and nieces............. .......
Great-greatuneles and aunts............
Relatives of the sixth degree___________
More distant relatives and strangers...
a.
Husband or w ife............... .........
Children............... ................ ........
Other descendants_____________
Adopted children....... ..................
Stepchildren......... ..................... .
Parents_______________________
Gr and p arents ,eto_____________
Stepparents_________ _______
Chfldren-in-Iaw___________ ____
Brothers and sisters...................
Nephews and nieces____________
Uncles and aunts.........................
Grandnephews, grandnieces___
Greatuneles, greataunts______
Cousins-german_______________
Great-grandnephews and nieces.
Great-great uncles and aunts___
Relatives o f the sixth degree...
More distant relatives and
strangers___________________
Baden.
Bavaria. Bremen.
Bruns
wick.
Ham
burg.
Hesse.
Lippe.
Lubeek.
MecklenburgSchwerin.
Olden
burg.
Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
4
_______
»2- 3
1
2- 3
2- 4
2- 4
1
2- 3
4- 8
4- 8
4
2i
1
1
4- 6
<*5- 7}
6-12
3
6-12
( e)
2
4
24
5- 7j
6-12
4
3
6- 9
4- 8
6
8
9
1
1
f5
«4
5- 7*
6-12
6-12
1
e6
5- 74
6-12
1- 2
6-12
9
24
4
6
4
8
6
6-12
6- 9
4
5- 7J
4
6-12
3
6
24
3
9
6- 9
4- 8
8
4
24
i
4
5- 74
4- 6
6-12
6.5
3- 4
3
6 -1 2
<
*5
4
2
5- 7J
6.3
4- 6
3- 4
6
8-16
8-16
5
3
24
7
3
10-15
6.5
6- 9
6
6
5
8-16
8-16
8
6
7
3
4- 6
3- 4
6
10-15
7
10-20
6
10-20
8
24
7
6
8-12
6
10-15
5
7
6
10-20
10-20
10
6
7
5
3
6
10-15
8-12
6
10-20
7
10-20
10
6
7
6
3- 4
10-15
10-20
10-15
8
8
10-20
10
6
24
7
6
10-15
5
10-15
10
8
10-20
8
10-20
10
6
10
6
10-15
5
10-15
8
10-20
10
8
10-20
10
10
10
8
8
10-15
5
10 15
10
10-20
9
10-20
10
10
Reuss
(elder
line).
Reuss
(younger
line).
SaxeAltenburg.
SaxeGotha.
SaxeCoburg.
SaxeMeiningen.
SaxeSaxony.
Weimar.
SchwarzSchaum- SchwarzWurtburg
burg-RuburgSonders- temberg.
Lippe. dolstadt. hausen.
nt. Per cent. Percent. Percent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cen t . Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
b3
2
4
............. 3'
6
2
4
2
4
4
2
4
4
6
«
8
3
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
8
8
4
4
2
4 -6
8-12
2- 3
3-4J I
8-12 I
8-12
4 -6
6 -9
8-12
8-12 j
8-12
8-12
8-12
8-12
8-12
10-15
a Only 1 per cent of offspring also inherit.
6 Exempt if with issue.
r N ot exempt if children are excluded.
J Unless children are excluded.
6
6
5
6
6
6
6
6
8
8
8
5
8
92
02
8
8
5
6
8
8
8
8
10
10
10
6'
6
4
4
6
4
6
6
4
9
9
6
6
4
4
6
4
6
6
4
6
6
8
10
9
8
6
6
5
6
4
6
6
4
4
5
4
5
5
4
5
5
*6
(D
6
.
2
8
2
4
6
3
.................
4
4
5
5
3
3
0
3
4
3
2
8
6
8
8
8
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
.................
8
8
2
4
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
5
8
8
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
3
2
3
4
4
5
5
4
5
5
5
3
4
4
c Exempt on 1,000 M. and on 20 per cent of the excess.
f Exempt on the interstate portion.
» Exempt on the compulsory share (one-half the interstate portion).
* Relatives, 6 per cent on the interstate portion.
Progressive rates are a recent development in Germany. Schaumbergheritances of more than 50,000 marks being subjected to additions of
Elppe had a slightly progressive collateral-inheritance tax as early as 5 or 10 per cent for each 50,000 or 100.000 marks, up to a maximum of
1811, but the maximum rate was only 3 per cent, and the progressive ! one and one-half or two times the basic rate.
feature was omitted from the law of 1880.
The recent progressive
In most of the States gifts intei; vivos were taxed like inheritances,
movement began in a small way in Baden in 1899, grandparents being but in some cases they were taxable only when made in contemplation
taxed 2 per cent Instead of 1 when the amount exceeded 5,000 marks, of death or when formally authenticated.
and certain collateral relatives 4 per cent instead of 3 on amounts
Bavaria has the beginning of a tax on corporations as a substitute
over 3,000 marks. More complete applications of the progressive prin for the inheritance t a x : the real estate of juristic persons, except
ciple were made by Hamburg and Lubeek in 1903, by Bremen in 1904, : charitable and religious institutions, is subject to a tax of 1 per cent
and by Anhalt and Reuss (younger line) in 1905, the rate on all in I once in twenty years.
F ra n ce in lik e m a n n er has a p r o g r e s s iv e in h e r ita n c e ta x , ch a w iin g i« a cco r d a n ce w ith th e d e g re e o f c o n sa n g u in ity , as sh o w n by th e fo llo w in g ta b le :
1 to 2,000
francs.
Direct line............................................................................... ...........................................
Husband or w ife.............................................................................................................. I
Brothers and sisters.........................................................................................................
Uncles and aunts, nephews and nieces.........................................................................
Great-uncles and great-aunts, grandnephews and grandnieces, cousins-german..
Relatives o f the fifth and sixth degrees......................................................................
Relatives beyond the sixth degree and strangers in blood...........„ ..........................j
2,001 to
10,000
franes.
10,001 to 50,001 to 100,001 to 250,001 to 500,001 to
500,000 1,000,000
250,000
50,000
100,000
francs.
francs.
francs.
francs.
francs.
Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent. Per cent.
1.00
2.00
2.50
• 1.25
1.50
1.75
2.50
3.75
4.00
4.50
5.50
6.00
5.00
6.50
10.50
9.00
9.50
10.00
11.00
11.50
8.50
12.00
12.50
11.00
13.00
11.50
10.00
10.50
14.00
14.50
15.00
13.00
13.50
12.50
12.00
16.00
16.50
17.00
14.00
14.50
15.00
15.50
17.00
17.50
18.00
15.50
16.00
16.50
.15.00
Over
1,000,000
franes.
Per cent.
2.50
7.00
12.00
13.50
15.50
17.50
18.50
1,000,001 to 2,000,001 to 5,000,001 to 10.000,001 to
Over
2,000,000
5,000,000
10,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000
francs.
francs.
francs.
francs.
trancs.
Direct line...................................................................................................................................
Husband or wife_______________ _____________________________ ________________ ___
Brothers and sisters.....................’ ........................................................................................
Uncles and aunts, nephews and nieces____________________ _____________________
Great-uncles and great-aunts, grandnephews and grandnieces, cousins-german.
Relatives of the fifth and sixth degrees------------------------------------- ---------------- --------Relatives beyond the sixth degree and strangers in biood______________________
988— 8491
Per cent.
3.00
7.00
12.00
13.50
15.50
17.50
18.50
Per cent.
3.50
7.50
12.50
14.00
16.00
18.00
19.00
Per cent.
4.00
8.00
13.00
14.50
16..50
18.50
19.50
Per cent.
4.50
8.50
13.50
15.00
17.00
19.00
20.00
Per cent.
5.00
9.00
14.00
15.50
17.50
19.50
20.50
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
4
Switzerland in like manner has the progressive inheritance
tax, a full account of which will be found on page 41, West,
Inheritance Tax.
In the Netherlands; Austria-Hungary; Italy; Russia; the
Scandinavian countries, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark; Bel
gium ; Spain; Portugal; Greece; Roumania; Bulgaria ; and in
Spanish America, Uruguay, Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Guatemala,
and Mexico, and Japan this system prevails.
In Australasia they have heavy, progressive taxes imposed, not
for the financial consideration alone, but also for the purpose
of breaking up large estates, rising to 10 per cent in Victoria,
New South Wales, South Australia, and western Australia; 13
per cent in New Zealand; and to 20 per cent in Queensland.
Mr. President, some time ago I called the attention o f the
Senate to the fact that the mortality tables of Australia, and
particularly of New Zealand, show that they do not have much
more than half the death rate we have in this country; and it
is directly due to the more equal distribution of wealth and the
better opportunity of life afforded to the man who toils.
Sir Charles Dilke, in Problems of Greater Britain, part 6,
chapter 1, declares that the institution of private property has
not been weakened nor capital driven from the colonies by these
progressive taxes. The Cape of Good Hope, Cape Colony,
has like duties. Seven of the principal colonies o f Canada have
succession duties with elaborate progressive scales: Ontario.
Quebec. Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba, Prince Edward
Island, and British Columbia.
NEED OP FEDERAL LAW TO PREVENT EVA SIO N .
I call the attention of the Senate to this important fact in
considering this matter, that whenever a fortune grows very
large the owner o f that fortune can easily transfer his residence
from a State which has an inheritance-tax law to a State which
has no inheritance-tax law, and in that manner evade it For
that reason it is of the highest importance that the Federal
Government should lay its hand upon the inheritance tax and
upon the gigantic fortunes which are built up under our system
of laws permitting monopoly to grow and flourish in this coun
try, so that, at the death of the ambitious individual who has
profited by our system, the people of the United States may have
restored to them that which has been created by their labor.
Mr. President, I have no idea whatever that the amendment
which I have the honor to propose will receive respectful con
sideration n ow ; I do not offer it with any such view. I offer
it because I desire the people of the United States to consider
it, not because I expect the Finance Committee to consider it.
This provision, if adopted by the people of the United States,
will provide an enormous amount—not tens of millions, but
hundreds of millions—that ought to go back to the people of the
United States: and with that fund we could then have available
a supply sufficient to improve the roads of the United States
from the Atlantic to the Pacific, to improve the waterways of
the United States and make transportation cheap, so that the
tremendous outflow of the wealth of the people of the United
States and their products might find an easy pathway to the
sea and to the commerce of the world.
IN H E R IT A N C E T A X IN T H E UN ITE D ST A T E S.
When this policy shall have been adopted by the people of the
The inheritance tax has been recognized in the United States
by the act o f July 6, 1797; by the war-revenue act o f July 1, United States, it will check the very dangerous accumulations
of gigantic fortunes which now comprise a serious menace to
1862; by the act of June 30, 1864; by the act o f April, 1898.
the people of the United States. Where a single fortune reaches
This law was repealed April 12, 1902 ( 32 U. S. Stats., 92).
The receipts from the inheritance tax of 1898 are shown in a thousand millions and an annual income of fifty millions,
increasing, as it must, in compounding geometric” ratio and
the following table:_________________
being typical, it is obvious that such an unequal distribution of
Percentage the proceeds of human labor is not only unjust, unwise, but is
Fiscal year.
Receipts.
of internal
dangerous to the peace and stability of the world.
revenue.
Fifty millions o f annual accumulations in one hand means
the deprivation of many millions of people of a part of their
1808-90____________
$1,235,435.25
0.452 slender earnings, and the accumulated force of all the demands
1899-1000__________
2,884,491.55
.977
1000-1901______________
.
5,211,898.88
1.690 o f all o f the great fortunes of the country, with their total
4,842,966.52
1.781 exactions, means the impoverishment of the weaker elements of
1902-3. ___________
5,356,774.00
2.322 society by artificial exactions, depriving them of their reason
1903-4____________________
2,072,132.12
able opportunity to the enjoyment o f life, of liberty, o f the pur
1904-5_______
774,354.59
1905-8__________
___
142,148.22
suit of happiness, and of the enjoyment of the fruits of their
own industry.
A m erica n in h e r ita n c e -ta x la ics, b y S t a t e s .
Monopoly and plutocracy have more power in this Republic
than they have in the kingdoms of Europe, where duties on in
Direct.
Collateral.
heritances universally prevail.
State.
Exemption.
! Rates.
Exemption.
Rates.
If the managers of this bill strike out the inheritance tax on
any pretense whatever, I shall certainly regard it as a tem
Per cent.
Per cent.
porary triumph o f selfishness over the influence of patriotism
Arkansas_______
5
It will be impossible to prevent for a great
“ $1,000 and righteousness.
California___
11-15
$500-$2,000
1-9
C o lorado___
10,000 while the imposition of inheritance taxes.
3-6
2
500
First, because it is
Connecticut10,000
3
10,000
1-2
right; second, because the judgment and the conscience of the
Delaware *_
5
501
Idaho ____
4,000 American people, with their increasing intelligence, will not
500-2,000
U-15
1-3
Illinois____
20,000 sustain the party now in power in such a gross lack o f its
2-6
500-2,000
1
Iowa , _
5
1,000
obvious duty—a duty earnestly recommended by the President
Kentucky „
5
500
Louisiana « _
10,000 o f the United States in his message of December 3, 1906, and
5
2
M aine___
4
500
approved by such men as the noble-hearted Andrew Carnegie,
Maryland-,
2J
500
who, in 1889, wisely said:
Massachusetts
1,000
10.000
3-5
1-2
Michigan_____
Minnesota.
Missouri_____
Montana
Nebraska___
New Hampshire______
New Jersey___
New Y o r k ___
North Carolina..........
North Dakota..
O h io ___
________
_
Oragcn____________ ____________
Pennsylvania_____
South D a k o t a ...____
Tennessee___________ _
Texas _____________________
U ta h ......................... ....................
Vermont______ _________
Virginia________________ _
Washington________________
West Virginia_____ __________
Wisconsin____ ______________
Wyoming ________________
5
11-5
5
5
2-6
5
5
5
11-15
2
5
2-6
5
2-10
5
2-12
5
5
5
3-12
3-71
11-15
5
100
10,000
*1
•2,000
10,000
500
500-2,000
* 1
1
7,500
10,000
1
3-4
10,000
2,000
1
• 5,000
1
5,000
By taxing estates heavily at death the state marks its condemnation
of the selfish millionaire's unworthy life.
It is desirable that nations
should go much further in this direction.
Indeed, it is difficult to
set bounds to the share of a rich man’s estate which should go at his
death to the public through the agency, of the state.
He also said:
500
.500
2,000
25,000
200
500-2,009
250
100-500250
500-2,000
10^000
There are exceptions to all rules, but not more exceptions, we think,
to this rule than to rules generally, that the “ almighty dollar ” be
queathed to children is an “ almighty curse.”
No man has a right
to handicap his son with such a burden as great wealth.
He also said :
5
10,000
i
i
10 000
20,000
“ 2.000
t 10,000
This policy would work powerfully to induce the rich man to attend
to the administration o f wealth during his life, which is the end that
society should always have in view, as being by far the most fruitful
for the people.
Nor need it be feared that this policy would sap the
root of enterprise and render men less anxious to accumulate, for, to
the class whose ambition it is to leave great fortunes and be talked
about after their death, it will attract even more attention, and, in
deed, be a somewhat nobler ambition, to have enormous sums paid
over to the state from their fortunes.
“ Widows and (except in W isconsin) minor children taxable only on
the excess above $10,000 received by each.
» Tax payable only by strangers in blood.
e Tax not payable when the property bore its just proportion of taxes
prior to the owner’s death.
* Applies to personal property only.
* Decedents’ estates of less than $10,000 are also exempt.
t For the surviving husband or wife and children, if residents of Wyo
ming. $25,000.
Mr. President, I sincerely hope that the managers o f this
bill will do themselves the credit, and the Republican party the
honor, to put into this bill a substantial progressive inheritance
tax, even if they do not approve the form of the amendment I
have the honor to proixise.
Mr. President, I submit a table of the proceeds of the inherit
ance taxes in the United States, and also in the several States.
988— 8491
..........
100-500
500
12 I
-3
CONGRESS] ON A L RECORD
PROCEEDS OF IN H E R IT A N C E T A X E S
IN T H E UN ITE D
STATES.
The inheritance taxes paid in the various States now amount to
about $10,000,000 a ' year.
Below are shown the receipts from this |
source for four years p a s t:
Proceeds of the national tax on legacies and distributive shares of per
sonal property, etc.— Continued.
Proceeds of state inheritance taxes. 1902-1906, in comparison with the
estimated true value of taxable wealth in each State, 190J
f.
Value of
personal
property,
1900° (mil
lions) .
State.
[In most cases the receipts reported are net receipts exclusive of com
missions, etc.]
Taxable
wealth,
Ham (mil
lions) .
State.
T niol Qno
ING Till H poim u ----------- W
i
Pennsylvania........................
Utah ~~.................................
$781
3,881
1,101
1.317
221
8,034
3.943
980
749
1,417
4,533
3,149
3,229
3,598
036
1 ,949
493
3,022
13.440
812
5,693
766
10,814
629
1,058
407
342
1,235
986
814
2,734
256
Inheritance-tax receipts.
1902-3.
1903-4.
$66
$1,605
“ 285,868
* 5,960
249,710
1,618
* 460,857
* 117,333
31,227
67,115
7)06,147
“ 163,572
3,422
142,564
* 8,506
* 2,804
138,932
4,665,736
39,276
1,300,835
<■66,007
44,144
29,440
19,612
8,292
1,367
1904-5.
° 286,561
<>5,961
265,781
3,272
b 460,858
* 141,721
10,694
73.899
91,559
562,193
* 181,539
$755
“ 532,713
< 48,646
>
284,117
3,102
* 688,312
* 141,722
67,001
69,076
76,665
694,181
187,036
122,030
* 8,506
* 2,805
306,551
* 6,038
* 2,120
438,035
5,428,052
16,000
78,209
6,826
1,080,578
202,668
4,627,051
5,324
406; 744
23,192
1,677,185
* 56,007
39,393
37,227
12,797
25,774
6,443
4,320
* 34,310
9,971
41,058
20,215
* 33,267
10,495
125,965
* 4,373
1905-6.
$850
* 48,647
274,259
* 688,312
190,748
86,655
70,534
107,820
712,720
289.025
159,455
213,131
*6,038
* 2,120
200,780
4,713,311
4,673
124,457
15,290
1,507,962
1,450
* 34,310
39,889
40,581
28,742
* 33,268
26,052
103,917
*4,373
° Refunds deducted.
6 One-half the receipts for two years.
c The figures here given represent the States share o n ly ; that is. in
the case of Montana, three-fifths of the total receipts ; and in the case
of Ohio, three-fourths of the net receipts.
The following table shows the receipts from the national tax on lega
cies and distributive shares of personal property during the two fiscal
years when it was most fully in operation, In comparison with the
estimated value of all personal property in each State or collection
d istric t:
P ro ceed s o f th e n a tion a l ta x on leg a cies and d is trib u tiv e sh a res o f p e r
sonal p r o p e r ty , 1900-1902, in com p a rison w ith th e es tim a ted tr u e va lu e
o f p ers o n a l p r o p e r ty , 1900.
State.
Alabama.......................................................
Arkansas______________________________
California and Nevada.—............................
Colorado and Wyoming...............................
Connecticut and Rhode Island..................
F l o r id a __________________________________________
Georgia.........................................................
Hawaii......................................................... .
Illinois_________________________________
Indiana...................... ........... ........... ...........
Iowa................................................................ .
Kansas, Oklahoma, and Indian Territory
Kentucky...........................................................
" Including stocks and b
988— 8491
Value of
personal
property,
1910° (mil
lions).
$401
296
1,235
596
704
168
453
Legacy-tax receipts.
1900-1901.
$1,353.10
88,518.41
2.081.26
358,954.73
282.27
3,144.68
5,303.76
2,711
345,636.55
9,35). 47
1,106
1,316
19,533.59
1,278
6.964.17
569
12.934.06
nds of railroads, etc.
1901-2.
$5,935.90
2,062.21
61,497.39
7,748.33
641,096.10
24,812.96
1,051.56
325,964.84
19,194.24
44,274.50
107.20
13,350.17
5
Louisiana and Mississippi._
Maryland, Delaware, and District of Columbia........................... ..........
Massachusetts.
_
Michigan.................. ................... .
Minnesota------ --------------Missouri___ _
__ _
Montana, Idaho, and Utali
_
Nebraska_______ .
New Hampshire, Maine, and Verm ont...
New Jersey........... ........... .
New Mexico and Arizona..
New York................ .. __
North Carolina.. . ___
North and South Dakota____
Ohio.................................... ..............
Oregon and Washington..
_
Pennsylvania...........
South Carolina........... ..........
Tennessee..................................
Virginia __-----------------------West Virginia............................
Wisconsin_________________
T o t a l.._______ ________
Legacy-tax receipts.
1900-1901.
1901-2.
$703
$20,186.62
$20,076.69
759
1,442
1,035
1,056
1,243
665
751
652
1,107
251
4,533
343
500
2,100
602
3,917
247
445
1,013
508
326
943
<>217,581.10
452,944.61
66,498.47
17,931.27
78,078.32
2,813.40
1,732.90
67,813.64
295,935.17
455.71
2,314,425.51
2,577.13
(«)
175,067.92
x141.21
571,019.10
2,780.25
6,395.58
18,264.77
8,373.08
2,865.09
33,890.78
*99,417.05
559,296.97
67,780.66
23,147.10
91,011.72
162,744.19
10,547.10
114,115.15
79,861.37
660.55
1,608,843.83
3,215.10
83.93
69,321.70
<<6,641.72
660,753.94
6,793.95
7,383.18
18,643.32
15,791.19
10,564.64
62,176.07
35,980
5,211,898.68
4,842,966.52
• Including stocks and bonds of railroads, etc.
6 Including Accomac and Northampton counties, Va.
c Included with Nebraska.
< Including Alaska.
*
Mr. President, these tables show what a small inheritance
tax will do, and I call attention to the fact that the state taxes
on inheritances are very small and the tax runs to small estates,
which I do not think at all desirable as far as a federal inherit
ance tax is concerned. The federal tax— inheritance tax—in my
judgment, should be confined to large estates and should be
made progressive, so as to abolish the present skillful evasion
of the constitutional law laid down by our ancestors against the
rule of primogeniture and entail.
E N T A IL AND PRIM O G E N IT U R E .
Mr. President, it is contrary to the welfare of the human
race to permit estates in perpetuity, and it is against the spirit
of the common law and it is against the constitutional rule
everywhere in force in our Republic forbidding primogeniture
and entail.
The rule of primogeniture is so well understood that no
man would be so imprudent as to attempt to leave his estate
subject to such a will. And the law of entail is equally well
understood, but it is in recent years avoided in various ingen
ious ways.
For example, by placing the property in trust; by incorpo
rating estates and placing the stock in the hands of trustees,
the corporation itself having a perpetual life. By the perpetual
life o f corporations has grown up a method of evading the
wise spirit of the rule forbidding primogeniture and forbid
ding the accumulation of vast properties in a single hand. In
my judgment there should be no apologetical treatment o f this
matter.
The accumulation of gigantic fortunes in a single hand,
with the huge power of increase where the income can not
be consumed, is dangerous to the commercial liberties of the
people; and because dangerous to commercial liberties of
the people it is dangerous to the political and civil liberty
o f the people.
o
POSTAL
SAVINGS
DEPOSITORIES
SrEECH
OF
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
O F
O K L A H O M A
I N T HE
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
FEBRUARY 25, 1910
'L
o s
W ASHINGTON
29883—8760
1910
—
-
M M I
[ amount]
e out si >
>unt of f
sland evarf
e o f U ni®
'oad bon<l|
r o f barn
outstandiH
)tion, in i f /
. It is H
bond ougH
tny purpolf
nate o f tmt
or wbetb#i«
instance f #
ys, no, th||
k iiim \vii\ir
-.mb ,
V, W
of ell
i;
ric
S P E E C H
OF
II O N .
ROBERT
L.
0 W EN
POSTAL SAVINGS DEPOSITORIES.
The Senate, as in Committee o f the Whole, resumed the con
sideration of the bill (S. 5876) to establish postal savings de
positories for depositing savings at interest with the security
of the Government for repayment thereof, and for other pur
poses.
Mr. OWEN. I ask that the amendment I have proposed to
the pending bill may be read.
The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read the pro
posed amendment.
The S ecretary . It is proposed to strike out all after the
enacting clause of Senate hill f>87G and to insert:
From and after the passage of this act the Comptroller of the Cur
rency shall set apart the annual tax on the circulation of the national
hanking associations of the United States as a special fund, to be desig
nated the “ bank depositors' guaranty fu n d ," to lie used by the comp
troller for the immediate payment of the depositors of any national
bank failing after the passage of this act. The net liquidated assets of
any national bank of which the Comptroller of the Currency takes charge
for the purpose of liquidation shall be deposited to the credit of the
“ bank depositors’ guaranty fund ” to the extent required to reimburse
such fund any moneys advanced by such fund for the payment of the
depositors of such bank.
No deposit under contract, either directly
or indirectly, to bear interest in excess of 4 per cent per annum on
time deposit, or in excess of 2 per cent per annum on current account,
shall be included in the insurance provided by this act. and no such
deposit shall be paid out of the “ bank depositors’ guaranty fund.”
That any state bank or trust company may have its deposits guar
anteed by the “ bank depositors’ guaranty fund ” upon an equitable
system to be prescribed by the Comptroller of the Currency and ap
proved by the President of the United States.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, in offering a substitute for the
postal savings-bank bill I do not do so under the belief that it
will be adopted by the Senate, but for the purpose of calling
attention to the importance of the subject-matter and because
as a Democrat, believing in the doctrine laid down by the
national Democratic convention, for one I should iike to offer to
the Senate at least an opportunity to conform to the proposal of
the Democracy in its last national platform, which is as follows:
We pledge ourselves to legislation under which the national banks
shall be required to establish a guaranty fund for the prompt payment
of the depositors of any insolvent national bank, under an equitable sys
tem which should be available to all state banking institutions wishing
to use it.
. .
We favor a postal savings bank if the guaranteed bank can not
secured, and believe that it should be so constituted as to keep tne
deposited money in the communities where the depositors live.
The postal savings-bank bill has been amended iu the comtnittee and in the Senate so as to provide that the money shall
29883—8760
3
be kept in the vicinity in which it is proposed these deposits
shall be made, and unless it be amended to the contrary before
its passage I should feel obliged to support the bill, because it
appeals to my judgment as being practical and sound, as serving
a great public use, and because I believe it to be constitutional;
but, Mr. President, I see no reason why the postal savings-bank
bill should not become a law, and at the same time the bankguaranty plan be applied to the national banks of the United
States under a system which would permit the state banks to
be the beneficiaries of that plan.
There has been carried on in this country a deliberate propa
ganda against either the postal savings-bank proposition or any
plan of mutual guaranty o f bank deposits by the legislative com
mittee of the American Bankers' Association. I hold in my
hand their rei>ort of a meeting in Chicago in September, 1909,
and, since they are deserving o f a hearing, I shall read their ob
jections. They sa y :
aterial
which
uerl agi
,000 o f
bf surpl
s so is;
^ut maj
aited St
1 bonds
(ited St;
tanding
say for
100 in
amoun
e out
unt of
sland ev;
a o f UnH
*oad boniH
r o f baiT
outstandil
)tion, in if
. It is
bond ouj
my purpc
nate of
or whethl
nstance f|
ys, no, till
Resolved, That the American Bankers’ Association is unalterably op
posed to any arbitrary plan looking to the mutual guaranty of deposits
either by a State or the Nation, for the following reasons :
1. It is a function outside of the State or National Government.
2. It is unsound in principle.
3. It is impracticable and misleading.
4. It is revolutionary in character.
5. It is subversive to sound economics.
6. It will lower the standard of our present banking system.
7. It is productive of and encourages bad banking.
8. It is a delusion that a tax upon the strong will prevent failures of
the weak.
9. It discredits honesty, ability, and conservatism.
10. A loss suffered by one bank jeopardizes all banks.
11. The public must eventually pay the tax.
12. It will cause and not avert panics.
Resolved, That the American Bankers’ Association is unalterably op
posed to any arbitrary plan looking to the mutual guaranty of
deposits either by a State or the Nation, believing it to be impracticable,
unsound, and misleading, revolutionary in character, and subversive to
sound economics, placing a tool in the hands of the unscrupulous and
inexperienced for reckless banking, and knowing further that such a
law weakens our banking system and jeopardizes the interests of the
people.
Every hostile economic suggestion of these excellent gentle
men has been fully met by the Oklahoma banking system and
demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt to be ludicrously untrue.
If there were any more adjectives available in the financial
vocabulary they would have been doubtless fised by these gen
tlemen, who, if they lived in the Indian country, would be called
“ Young-men-afraid-of-losing-their-deposits.”
When their ver
bal abuse is all summed up, the meaning o f this opposition of
the members of this legislative committee o f the American
Bankers’ Association can, I think, be put in a few words,
namely, that the very few citizens representing the larger
banks of the country who practically dominate and control this
association, believe that a guaranty plan making safe the de
posits of the small banks will take away from the larger banks,
to some measurable extent, a portion of their deposits. In my
own judgment, they are in error as to this, because when the
small banks become the depositories o f the money which is now
hidden in private hoards and which is not now in circulation in
any bank, the increasing deposits passing into the hands o f the
small banks will, through the reserve system, contribute most
substantially to the city banks. I think the accuracy of their
29883— 8760
5
criticism of this system is perhaps illustrated also by the
accuracy of their prophecies. They sa y :
Your committee’s greatest work during the past year was that of
preparing plans and assisting the committee of the savings bank section
in defeating the numerous measures for the establishing of a postal
savings banking system for the United States.
„
W e will not at this time discuss the various bills, as they are all
dead (peace to their memory).
It seems that they are not all dead, but the spirit of the pos
tal savings plan is very much alive in the pending bill. The
present postal savings-bank bill is offered to the country in pur
suance of the declaration of the Republican platform, pledging
to the people of the United States a postal savings-bank bill.
Both parties are committed to this proposition—the Demo
cratic party in the alternative, the Republican party directly.
I shall stand for this bill in the alternative, as proposed by the
national Democracy, and I shall at the proper time propose this
amendment to the bill, as well as offer it as a substitute for
this bill.
Mr. President, on the 15th o f January, 190S, I introduced
a bill, Senate 3988, providing substantially for the above pro
vision, for the purpose of preventing panics in the United
States and for the purpose of giving stability to our national
commerce. On the 14th of February, 1908, the State of Okla
homa passed an act establishing a bank depositors’ guaranty
fund for the state banks of Oklahoma, under which the national
banks of that State might avail themselves of the bank depos
itors’ guaranty fund by a plan to be agreed on between the
authorities of the State and the Comptroller of the Cur
rency. The Comptroller of the Currency held that no na
tional bank could be authorized, under the law, to take ad
vantage o f the privileges offered by the State of Oklahoma,
and the Attorney-General of the United States, in an opinion,
sustained that view of the Comptroller of the Currency. In
consequence, 73 national banks in Oklahoma in the first seven
teen months of the operation of the Oklahoma bank depositors’
guaranty law gave up their charters as national banks and be
came state banks of Oklahoma.
Up to date I understand that over 90 of the national banks
have given up their charters in the State of Oklahoma. That
is, over a fourth of these banks have retired in less than two
years.
Are you prepared to let the national banking system in Okla
homa lose further prestige by refusing the remedy I propose?
The actual operation of the bank depositors’ guaranty fund
has been the most brilliant answer to every hostile prophecy
and the most triumphant reply to every critic of the system.
The Oklahoma statute was drawn with great care, with the
active assistance and cooperation of many of the leading bankers
of that State.
Every reasonable safeguard was provided to give the Okla
homa banks the greatest security and stability possible. For
example, the persons organizing a bank were subject as indi
viduals to the approval of the bank commissioner of the State^
who required such persons to be men of good character and or
good precedents, and free from the suspicion of engaging in the
banking business for speculative purposes.
A double liability was inqiosed upon stockholders.
The capital was required to be fully paid.
29883— 8760
The bank was not permitted to receive money on deposit in
excess of ten times the amount of its paid-up capital and sur
plus, but provided for increase of capital in that event to cor
respond with increase of deposits.
It was forbidden to pay interest on deposits in excess of a
rate to be fixed from time to time by the bank commissioner,
who fixed a low rate not exceeding 4 per cent on time deposits
and a lower rate on current accounts.
Real estate loans in excess of 20 per cent of the aggregate
loan of such banks was forbidden.
The bank commissioner was authorized to require the in
crease of the bank’s capital or surplus to prevent an excess of
the bank’s deposits of over ten times its capital and surplus.
The active bank officers were forbidden to lend the money of
the bank to themselves.
The bank was forbidden to employ its moneys in trade or
commerce, to buy the stock of other banks, or to make loans on
its own capital stock.
The banks were required to carry a reserve o f from 20 per
cent in towns of 2,500 or less to 25 per cent in towns exceed
ing 2.500 inhabitants.
Savings associations were required to keep 10 per cent of their
deposits on hand in cash and 10 per cent additional in bonds of
the United States, or state, county, or municipal bonds of the
State of Oklahoma worth not less than par.
The total liabilities to any bank of any person, company, cor
poration, or firm for money borrowed, including in the liabili
ties of such company the liabilities of the several members
thereof, were forbidden in excess o f 20 per cent of the capital
stock actually paid in.
Banks in an insolvent condition were forbidden to receive de
posits.
Suitable penalties were provided for any false report or im
proper conduct.
Full publicity was required.
Frequent rei>orts and examinations were provided.
Overdrafts were forbidden, the officer o f the bank allowing
the same to be personally liable.
Preference to any depositor or creditor by pledging the assets
of the bank as collateral security was forbidden.
Habitual borrowing for the purpose of reloaning was placed
under control.
The immediate replacement of an impaired capital was pro
vided.
A bank depositors’ guaranty fund was provided, to reach in
twenty years an equivalent of 5 per cent of the average dei>osits
of the banks, the guaranty fund to equal 1 per cent of the de
posits for the first year and a sum equal to one-twentieth of
such 5 per cent, or one-fourth of 1 per cent of such deposits i>er
annum, until the total amount of 5 per cent of such dei>osits
should have been paid at the end of twenty years.
New banks organizing were required to set aside 3 per cent of
their capital for the guaranty fund.
Additional assessments were provided for in case o f extraor
dinary emergency, with a proviso that the emergency assess
ments should not in any calendar year exceed 2 per cent of the
average daily dei>osits of such banks and trust companies.
29883— 8760
7
If the emergency assessments should prove to be insufficient to
pay off the depositors of any failed banks having valid claims
against said depositors’ guaranty fund, the state banking board
is required to issue and deliver to each depositor having any
such unpaid deposit a certificate of indebtedness for the amount
of his unpaid deposit, bearing G per cent interest, consecutively
numbered and payable in serial order.
The law provided that any bank put in liquidation by the
bank commissioner should have its depositors immediately paid
from the bank depositors’ guaranty fund. The bank commis
sioner has similar powers to the Comptroller of the Currency.
The banks are forbidden to loan money in excess of 12 per
cent, with a legal rate of 7 per cent.
Mr. President, I have thus outlined the principal featuresof the Oklahoma law, because it has been much misunderstood
throughout the United States and indeed has been grossly
misinterpreted by special interests, who regard the prosperity
of small banks and the growth of the deposits of small banks
with hostility, upon the narrow and unsound doctrine that the
volume of deposits going to small banks will diminish the
volume of deposits in the large banks.
In point of fact, as the deposits o f the small banks grow,
such banks naturally become depositors in the larger banks
of the country to the extent which the convenience of commerce
justifies.
For the information of the Senate and for the information
of the people of the United States, I requested a statement
from the state banking department of Oklahoma and submit
the following letter from Hon. A. M. Young, bank commissioner,
together with the inclosed condensed and comparative state
ments, giving the resources and condition of the state banks
and of the national banks between February 14, 1908. when the
Oklahoma bank-depositors’ guaranty law went into effect, and
June 23, 1909, with a further statement between June 23, 1909,
and November 16, 1909:
State
Ban
k in g
D epartm en t,
State of O k lah o m a
,
Guthrie, February i, 1910.
Hon. R o b e r t L. O w e n ,
1 a sh in g ton , D . C.
W
M y D e a r M r . O w e n : Y o u r t e le g r a m r e c e iv e d .
I s h o u ld h a v e g iv e n
t h is m a tt e r a t te n tio n e a r lie r , b u t I h a v e b e e n e x t r e m e ly b u sy .
I inclose condensed and comparative statements which will give you
some idea as to the popularity and growth of the guaranty law in our
State.
We have had three national and three state bank failures since the
law went into effect. Three national banks have converted into state
banks since the failure of the Columbia Bank and Trust Company and
three state banks have converted into national.
1 have had about 2o
applications for new banks since the failure of the Columbia Bank
and Trust Company.
I took charge of the Columbia September 20. with deposits of
$2,000,000.
The doors were never closed, but individual depositors
were paid as they called for their money. This large failure did not
in the slightest degree interfere with other banks or the financial inter
ests of the city or State.
* *
*
.
* *
*
In fact, in the first sixty days after this failure state banks
gained more than 33 per cent in deposits and the national banks some
thing like 1(5 per cent.
I mention this, as it is entirely foreign to wnar
usually follows a bank failure.
_
„ __
The First State Bank at Kiefer had on deposit with the farm er.
National Bank at Tulsa something over $20,000 at the time nie lat
institution failed.
I took charge of this bank December 14. 1 ney i
$78,000 on deposit.
In eight days’ time every single depositor n
29883— 8760
1-
Us
1
a*
r i or
'I
|
|
.
Kpank V
r t wot
Eu at
| y til
I
c
<
e
ti
r nud<
lc , an,'
1 yet
8
received their money. The Farmers’ National Bank, which closed on
the above date, is still closed.
The way a failed national bank is handled Is very little short of
barbarism.
If there is any other information desired that I can give you do not
hesitate to call for it.
Assuring you of my best wishes, I am,
Very respectfully,
A. M. Y o u n g ,
a
|ge ini N
1; onto
I as
Isf.-moi &
liited
I denio
| emei
lead.
p Okla
the i
t they
to.
banks.
• defii
e
eir quo
le thrc
laterial
which
ued ag
),000 o
if surp
es so is
)ut ma:
lited St
1 bonds
lited St
landing
gay for
100 in
1
n
’r;
at
ft
l
1
1
jl
lU
j
H
m
h
M
l
sland evi
a o f Unit
road boni
r o f bai
outstandj
ition, in
. It is
bond ouji
tny purptj
nate o f ^
;or wbetli |
nstauce f4
’ys, no, tb |
Ban
k in g
D
epartm en t,
G u t h r i e , O k la .
CO N SO LIDA TE D ST A T E M E N T OF T H E CO N D ITIO N OF ST A T E B A N K S IN O K L A
H O M A AND O TH E R IN F O R M A T IO N IN REGARD TO N A TIO N A L AND STATE
B A N K S A S S H O W N BY REPO RTS OF CO M PTRO LLER OF T H E CU RRENCY AND
OF T H E B A N K C O M M IS S IO N E R OF O K L A H O M A UNDER DATE OF JU N E
23, 1909.
Consolidated statement of the condition of the state banks in Okla
homa, and other information in regard to national and state banks, as
shown by reports under date of June 23, 1 9 0 9 :
S t a t e h a n k s o f t h e S t a t e o f O k la h o m a .
RESO U RCES.
Loans and discounts-------------------------------------------------------------$35, 137, 300. 08
719, 616. 37
O v e r d r a fts__________________________________________________
Bonds, warrants, and securities---------------------------------------3, 598, 934. 06
Banking house, furniture, and fixtures---------------------------2, 274, 558. 28
Other real estate owned__________________________________
307, 304. 71
Due from banks_____________________________________________
14, 390, 114. 86
299,
479. 34
Exchange for clearing house_____________________________
Checks and other cash items_____________________________
280,
325. 60
Cash in banks------------------------------------------------------------------------3, 643, 366. 56
a
60, 650, 999. 86
LIABILITIES.
Capital stock paid in---------------------------------------------------------Surplus f u n d ------------------------------------------------------------------------Undivided profits------------------------------------------------------------------Due to banks------------------------------------------------------------------------Individual deposits_________________________________________
Cashiers’ and certified checks____________________________
Bills payab le____________________
R e d iscou n ts_________________________________________________
-ti
.n
ih<
01
?e
■g
•ti
I amount
e out
mnt of
B a n k C o m m issio n er.
State
-03'
_ed
ijtl
k
;iet
ia
-■DC
h
_S
m
d
10, 270,
758,
1, 615,
3, 896,
42, 722,
527,
729,
138,
800. 00
774. 03
882. 23
541. 02
927. 57
593. 53
250. 98
230. 50
60, 650, 999. 86
The Oklahoma guaranty law went into effect February 14, 1908,
since which time 163 state banks have been chartered, 73 of which
were conversions of national banks, with deposits approximating
$7,300,000.
Individual deposits In state banks February 29, 1 908__$18, 032, 284. 91
Individual deposits in national banks February 14,
1 9 0 8 _______________________________________________________
3 8 ,2 9 8 ,2 4 7 .0 7
Individual deposits in
state banksJune23,1 9 0 9__
42, 722, 927. 57
38,
111, 948. 40
Individual deposits in
nationalbanksJune23,1 9 0 9______
Gain in state bank deposits since the guaranty law
went into effect___________________________________________
24, 690, 644. 66
Loss in national bank deposits for the same length of
186, 298. 67
tim e _______________________________________________________
5, 833, 216. 65
Capital stock of state banks February 29, 1908________
Capital stock of national banks February 14, 1 9 0 8____
12, 215, 350. 00
Capital stock of state banks June 23, 1 9 0 9 _____________
10, 270, 800. 00
Capital stock of national banks June 23, 1 909_________
9, 730, 000. 00
Number of state banks February 29, 1908, 470.
Number of national banks February 14, 1908, 312.
Number of state banks June 23, 1909. 631.
Number of national banks June 23, 1909, 222.
Ninety national banks have converted and liquidated since guaranty
law went into effect.
Average reserve held by state banks June 23, 1909, 4 2 .3 ’ per cent.
The state banks of Oklahoma on February 5, April 28, and June 23,
1909, held a higher reserve than the national banks of any State in
the Union except Colorado.
Bank failures, none.
A. M . Y o u n g ,
Bank Commissioner.
29883— 8760
9
State
B a n k in g
D
epartm en t,
Guthrie, Okla.
Consolidated statem ent of the condition of all state banks in the State
of Oklahoma, as shown by reports under dates of June 23, 1909, and
November 16, 1909.
June 23,1909.
Nov. 16, 1909.
631
662
Doans and discounts........................ ............................. $35,137,300.08
Overdrafts_______________
719,616.37
Bonds, warrants, and securities.................................
3,598,934.06
Banking- house, furniture, and fixtures....................
2,274,558.28
Other real estate owned................................................
307,304.71
Due from banks.................... ............. ........................... 14,390,114.86
Exchange for clearing house............. .........................
299.479.34
Checks and other cash items......................................
280,325.60
Cash in banks................................... ............ ...............
3,643,366.56
$35,010,721.96
2,248,575.08
3.543.359.18
2,396,957.14
234,726.09
18,506,385.20
1.653.558.19
497,346.52
4,607,348.70
Number of banks.................
...........
RESO U RCES.
Total........................................ ............ ...................
60,650,999.86
68,700,978.06
L IA B IL IT IE S .
Capital stock paid in.....................................................
Surplus fu n d .............. ................... ..................... .........
Undivided p r o fits .._______________ __________
Due to banks.................................................................
Individual deposits.................................
Cashiers’ and certified checks
Bills payable............................. ....................
Rediscounts.......................................................
10,270,800.00
10,767,800.00
881,340.87
7.38,774.03
1,615,882.23
1,511,122.34
3.896,541.02
« 4,537,080.83
42,722,927.57 ° 49,775,433.41
527,593.53
° 650,752.02
720,250.96
428,378.37
138,230.50
149,070.22
60,650,999.86
68,700,978.06
42.3
49.7
Average reserve held ..................................percent.
i
0 Total deposits, $54,963,266.25.
Increase in individual deposits between June 23, 1909, and
November 16, 1909.................................................................................
$7,052,505.84
Increase in individual deposits between September 1 and Novem
ber 16, 1909 ................................................................................................... 4,998.173,96
A. M. Y oung , Bank Commissioner.
Mr. OWEN, Mr. President, I am informed by the bank com
missioner that in his judgment the bank guaranty fund of the
State of Oklahoma will not be seriously impaired when the
assets of the Columbia Bank and Trust Company have been
entirely liquidated; that the private depositors will lose noth
ing and that the State will lose nothing.
It will be observed that the state banks in Oklahoma had
only $18,032,000 of individual deposits on February 29, 1908. and
on November 16, 1909, had $49,775,433.41 of individual deposits,
with total deposits of over $54,963,000, an increase of about 200
per cent in deposits in less than two years.
The individual deposits in the national banks February 14,
1908, were $38,298,000 and the individual deposits in national
banks on June 23, 1909, were $38,111,000, showing a gain in the
state-bank deposits in seventeen months of over $30,000,000 and
a loss in national-bank deposits of $186,000.
Seventy-three national banks, however, during this period
were converted into state banks with deposits approximating
$7,300,000, so that this item must be considered in comparing
the two systems.
29883— 8760
10
The number of state banks has increased from 470, February
29, 1908, to 662 banks. The number of national banks has de
creased from 312 to 222 banks, June 23, 1909.
In this short time the state banks from exceeding the national
banks in number by about 50 per cent now exceed the national
banks in number by about 300 per cent.
The increase in individual deposits in the state banks be
tween June 23, 1909. and November 16, 1909, was $7,052,505.84,
a very remarkable showing, considering that in September the
serious bank failure of the Columbia Bank and Trust Company,
a state bank at Oklahoma City, with deposits approximating
three millions. Notwithstanding this failure, the individual de
posits of the state banks increased from September 1 to No
vember 16, 1909, $4,998,173.96.
The average reserve held by the Oklahoma state banks June
23, 1909, was 42.3 per cent—a higher reserve than that of any
of the national banks of any State in the Union, except Col
orado. And on November 16, 1909, the average reserve held by
the Oklahoma state banks was 49.7 per cent— a reserve about as
great as the average reserve o f the Bank of England—and
offering a favorable comparison with the Treasury of the United
States, as against its outstanding liabilities.
Mr. President, the State of Oklahoma has the best banking
system in the United States; it is a model for the balance of the
United States. It protects the small depositor and gives him
confidence, and when there is a loss due to mismanagement the
loss is distributed in such a manner that it is not felt by any
of the banks contributing. It is, after all, merely a mutual
insurance plan.
And this is the banking system, Mr. President, which is criti
cised by the American Banking Association as unsound, and as
a reckless banking system. It is precisely the contrary. It has
promoted stability, a high reserve, and banking of the highest
order.
The confidence of the people o f Oklahoma in this improved
banking system is shown by the deposits of the people in
creasing nearly 200 per cent in less than two years. The pref
erence of the people to this banking system over the national
banking system is clearly manifested by this extraordinary
mark of their confidence in making their deposits. The na
tional banks gained but a small per cent, comparatively, on an
average, and the state banks gained nearly 200 per cent in this
short period of time.
This development o f confidence is reflected in the marvelous
growth of our towns and cities in Oklahoma, which are growing
as rapidly as these astonishing deposits. Let States and cities
who want to learn the secret of confidence, of stability, and of
rapid development come to Oklahoma and learn the lesson from
her wise and virtuous laws.
Mr. President, I had the privilege of establishing the first
national bank in Indian Territory, and caused the extension of
the national-bank act to that Territory which afterwards l>ecame Oklahoma. My personal interests have been, and are now,
almost exclusively in the national banks. The national bank
ing system is splendidly administered: it is worthy of all honor
and credit. Those banks are thoroughly deserving of the confi
dence of the depositors of the country, and I should like to see
the national banks enjoy the full prosperity to which they are
29883— 8760
11
entitled. During the ten years preceding the last panic the
loss to the national-bank depositors did not exceed $1 per an
num out of exceeding ,$60,000 dollars of deposits. The abrasion
of gold coin in the pockets of the people would greatly exceed
this. It is a wonderful record of fidelity and of sound adminis
tration. Yet, notwithstanding this high tribute to the national
banking system, we can not forget that a failure such as that
of the National Rank of Commerce, of Kansas City, involving
a bank whose deposits amounted to thirty-five millions, shook
the confidence o f the depositors contributing to this bank in
twelve or fifteen States. The Walsh failure, in Chicago, served
a like harmful purpose in the region of the Great Lakes.
The Morse-Heinze failures in New York shook the confi
dence of the depositors on the Atlantic seaboard. These fail
ures could have been easily prevented by the guaranty fund
plan. It may be true that the depositors under this system
may have lost nothing through the National Bank of Com
merce, nor through the Walsh failure, but they had their
money tied up; they could not get their deposits when they
wanted them, and the consequence is the statistical argument
is not satisfying to the ordinary depositor, while it may be
persuasive to the statesman who is not considering the subject
from the standpoint of a depositor.
Our national-bank act should be amended, and amended im
mediately. It would cost the Government o f the United States
nothing whatever to provide this mutual insurance plan for
the depositors of the national banks, and every State in the
Union would immediately follow suit.
This system would give to the people of the United States
freedom from financial disturbance, freedom from commercial
disturbance. When the banks are disturbed every business
man in the country is disturbed, for all of our business men
are both borrowers and depositors.
A brilliant example of the stability obtained by the mutual
insurance plan was shown in the failure of the Columbia Bank
and Trust Company at Oklahoma City, a state institution, with
about $3,000,000 of deposits. If this had been a national bank
and these deposits had been tied up, to be ultimately paid after
the bank assets were liquidated, involving from two to five
years, it would have left a harvest of distrust. As it was, the
depositors were promptly paid; they immediately redeposited
their funds with other banks, and the state banks gained
$4,998,000 of deposits from September 1 to November 16, 1900,
in two months and a half, showing that the confidence of the
people was not impaired by the failure of the Columbia Bank
and Trust Company. The people were not hurt by it. The
banks of Oklahoma City were not thrown into a panic by it;
the commerce of Oklahoma City suffered no serious embarrass
ment and no shock; the banks did not force their clients to pay
up under pressure, but the business of the community remained
undisturbed, and the value of the Oklahoma bank system was
triumphantly vindicated and its great worth demonstrated in a
manner which should forever silence the criticism of those who
prophesied evil of it, and who desire to deal fairly, frankly,
and justly with this economic question.
The bank mutual-insurance plan by the guaranty fund is pref
erable to the postal savings system, because the banks can
29883— 8760
12
!
il
■
1
3
r;
1
)
•ij
t
lited St
funding®
3ay for
100 in
.1
ib
0
1
&
•t
amour
e out
bunt of
j£
ft
afford to pay a higher rate of interest than the Government
offers through the postal savings plan.
It avoids increasing the governmental activities or offices and
leaves the people to manage their own business without increase
o f government expense or supervision, beyond the present
supervision of the comptroller.
The postal savings bank is but another form of the guaranty
o f bank deposits. It is an unlimited but justifiable guaranty
by the United States.
If the guaranty of bank deposits can not be established, then
as an alternative I approve of the postal savings-bank system
under the amendments accepted by the Senator from Montana,
as set forth in the reprints of this bill, under date of February
3, 1910. This system will not take money away from the small
communities to concentrate such funds in the large financial
centers, but will be an important auxiliary to the state banks
and to the national banks, by adding to their deposits those
funds which would not be deposited at all, unless such de
posits were properly guaranteed. The guaranty of the United
States of these deposits will bring from hiding many millions
o f dollars, which will be immediately redeposited in the local
banks. Under this system the unreasoning panic and want
o f confidence, which has heretofore caused bank depositors to
withdraw currency for hoarding, will be prevented. It may
not entirely prevent the occasional withdrawal for hoarding by
wealthy manipulators, who occasionally lock up currency for
speculative purposes in order to depress the stock market and
take advantage of such depression as buyers of depressed
stocks, but it will make the country outside of the influence
o f the rich manipulators incapable of being stampeded by the
cry of panic, and will go far to give stability to our national
commerce, a consummation devoutly to be wished.
The postal savings bill should add to our national banking
capital several thousand millions of dollars, because every dol
lar of currency brought from hiding means approximately
$10 o f deposits and $10 of loans, the ratio of currency to
deposits in the national banks of the United States being at
least 10 to 1, as will appear from the reports o f the Comptroller
o f the Currency.
If we can not have the depositors’ guaranty plan, I should
approve the postal savings bill as now drawn.
Mr. President, I can not acquiesce in the suggestion that the
postal savings bill violates the Constitution of the United States,
for the reason that I regard the postal savings system as a
legitimate extension of the postal service.
The Constitution of the United States was established by the
people of the United States, and was ratified by the people of
the various States acting through their constituted authority,
and was drawn, as its preamble declares:
In order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domes
tic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general
welfare, and so forth.
ie
n
"l
. It is
bond oufjj
my purpl
nate of
or whetlB
nstance
ys, no, tl||
|
■
i
rC
1
p
And the idea of promoting the general welfare runs like a
golden thread throughout the entire Constitution, giving life
and vitality to clauses which require interpretation in the light
o f this national purpose.
While I do not believe that section 8, Article I, which provides
for the laying and collecting of taxes, could be construed to
29883—87G0
13
apply to any and all objects beyond this obvious and manifest
purpose o f the raising of taxes, I do believe that the Constitu
tion of the United States, authorizing the establishment of the
postal system, providing for the establishment of post-offices
and post-roads, is not extended unduly when it embraces the
postal savings system. In its primary establishment it was nec
essarily crude, but by the common consent of all of the people
of the United States it has been gradually extended without
protest, without conflict, without challenge on the part of any
one that it was a violation of the Constitution of the United
States as it has been expanded.
For example, in the matter of issuing money orders, a citizen
goes to a post-office, deposits his money in the post-office, re
ceives a postal money order payable either to himself or to
his order. It becomes, in effect, a bill of exchange, to be cashed
by the post-office in any part of the United States. It is, in fact,
a banking transaction. It is making the post-office a place of
deposit. It is making the post-office a place where deposits are
paid, and the extension of the postal savings system, in the man
ner proposed in this bill, is only an enlargement providing that
these transactions shall be limited to a fixed amount and shall
bear interest. Mr. President, since the consent o f the governed
is the best evidence o f the justification of government and since
the Republican party, through its national platform, has de
clared in favor of the postal savings-bank system, and since the
Democratic party has made the same declaration through its
platform, and since the people of the United States, from the
Atlantic to the Pacific, have voted for candidates upon those
two platforms, I take it there never was a proposition brought
before the Congress that had a more universal acquiescence
of the people in its constitutionality. I therefore take it that
it is not outside of the grant o f constitutional power to extend
the postal system so as to include the postal savings plan, be
cause it is a reasonable expansion of the conveniences o f the
post-offices established under the Constitution and because such
expansion is universally approved by the people of the United
States.
More than that, Mr. President, since the postal savings plan
is of the greatest importance in preventing panics in this coun
try, by providing a safe place of deposit, by taking care of those
depositors who are the most timid of any, and who always con
stitute a menace to the banks of the country by precipitating
runs on the banks because of their fears, and since this system
will be an important factor in preventing financial panic, the
postal savings system will be an agency of the United States in
regulating commerce between the States and preventing its
paralysis by panic.
By preventing panic it will serve also as an agency o f govern
ment in regulating the value of money or its purchasing power.
I have heretofore shown that money in times of panic has twice
the purchasing power which it has in times of financial pros
perity.
I take it that both parties in the United States, through their
representatives in national convention believed the postal sav
ings system to be constitutional, otherwise both parties in
the United States would not have committed themselves to the
postal savings system, and therefore it is in order to justify
this legislation, outside of constitutional considerations, by say29883— 8760
T
14
ing that it would promote the providence of the people, their
economy, their thrift. Outside o f the constitutional argument,
this legislation is justified because it will bring from hiding
immense hoards of banking capital and will add greatly to our
financial strength and to our commercial power as a nation.
Every other civilized nation in the world has adopted it.
Gladstone declared that it was the most important act of his
long life to have promoted this system in the British Empire.
For these reasons, Mr. President, I should give my adherence
to this bill in the event that the Senate does not accede to the
plan proi>osed for the strengthening o f the national banks,
which I should like to see done in any contingency, and I shall
at the proper moment offer such an amendment to the consid
eration and vote of the Senate, after it shall have been dis
posed of by the vote of the Senate, as a proi>osed substitute.
A P P E N D IX .
Statutes of the State of Oklahoma.
C h a p t e r VI.
BANKS
1
ji
A
A
A
r t ic l e
r t ic l e
r t ic l e
A ND
BANKING.
I. Organization.
II. Banking board— guaranty fund.
III. B a n k c o m m i s s i o n e r .
A
r t ic l e
I.
O RG AN IZA TIO N .
i
1
t
In
ih
o
J
>
4
■
t
-B
-2»
d
„V
1
e
L
i
l
rc;
An act relating to banks and banking and declaring an emergency, as
amended by laws of 1909, senate Dill 39, same being a bill entitled
“ An act to amend chapter 6 of the Session Laws of Oklahoma, 1907—
8,
relating to banks and banking, and declaring an emergency,” taking
effect March 11, 1909.
S e c . 278. Three persons may organize a bank procedure.
Any three
or more persons, approved by the bank commissioner, a majority of
whom shall be residents of this State, may execute articles of incor
poration and be incorporated as a banking corporation in the manner
hereinafter provided.
Said articles of incorporation shall contain the
corporate name adopted by the corporation, which shall not be the same
name used by any corporation previously organized, or any limitation
of such name ; the place where its business is to be conducted ; the pur
pose for which it is formed ; the amount of its capital stock, which
shall be divided into shares of the par value of $100 each: the name
and place of residence of and number of shares subscribed by each
stockholder ; and the names of the stockholders selected to act as the
first board of directors, each of whom shall be a bona fide holder of at
least $500 of the stock of said bank, fully paid and not hypothecated ;
the length of time the corporation is to exist, which shall not exceed
twenty-five y e a rs; and such other matters not inconsistent with law as
the incorporators may deem proper. Said articles of incorporation shall
be subscribed by at least three of the stockholders of the proposed
banking corporation, and shall be acknowledged by them and filed in
the office of the secretary of state and a copy thereof, duly certified by
the secretary of state, shall be filed with the bank commissioner. The
secretary of state shall issue a certificate in the form provided by law
for other corporations, and the existence of such bank as a corporation
shall date from the filing of its articles of incorporation and the issu
ance of certificate of the secretary of state, from which time it shall
have and may exercise the powrers conferred by law upon corporations
generally, except as limited or modified by this a c t : Provided, That
such bank shall transact no business except the election of officers and
the taking and approving of their official bonds, the receipt of payments
on account of subscriptions of its capital stock, and such other busi
ness as is incidental to its organization until it shall have been author
ized by the bank commissioner to commence the business of banking as
hereinafter provided.
S e c . 279. Conditions precedent to doing business: When the capital
stock of any bank shall have been paid up the president or cashier
thereof shall transmit to the bank commissioner a verified statement
showing the names and places of residence of the stockholders, the
amount of stock subscribed, and the amount paid in by each, and the
29883— 8760
15
bank commissioner shall thereupon have the same power to examine
into the condition and affairs of such bank as if it had before that time
been engaged in the banking business; and if the commissioner is satis
fied that such bank has been organized as prescribed by law, and that
its capital is fully paid, and that it has in all respects complied with
the law, he shall issue to such bank, under his hand and seal, a certifi
cate showing that it has been organized, and its capital paid in as
required by law, and is authorized to transact a general banking busi
ness : Provided, That in the reorganization of a bank or trust com
pany the assets may be accepted in lieu of cash at their actual value.
S kc. 280. Amount of deposit— in terest: A banking corporation organ
ized under the provisions of this act shall be permitted to receive money
on deposit not to exceed ten times the amount of its paid-up capital and
surplus, deposits of other banks not included, and to pay interest
thereon not to exceed the rate that may from time to time be fixed by
the bank commissioner, as the maximum rate that may be paid upon
deposits by banks in this State ; to buy and sell, exchange, gold, silver,
coin, bullion, uncurrent money, bonds of the United States, or of this
State, or of any city, county, school district, or other municipal cor
poration thereof, and state, county, city, township, school district, or
other municipal indebtedness; to lend money on chattel and personal
security, or on real estate secured by first mortgages, running not
longer than one year : Provided, That such real-estate loans shall not
exceed 20 per cent of the aggregate loans of any such bank ; to own a
suitable building, furniture and fixtures, for the transaction of its busi
ness, the value of which shall not exceed one-third of the capital of
such bank fully paid : Provided, That nothing in this section shall pro
hibit such hank from holding and disposing of such real estate as it
may acquire through the collection of debts due i t : And provided fur
ther, That all banking institutions now organized as corporations doing
business in this State are hereby permitted to continue said business as
at present incorporated, but in all other respects their business, and the
manner of conducting the same and the operation of said bank, shall be
carried on subject to the laws of this State and in accordance there
with : And provided further, That no bank, except those that have com
plied with or that may be organized under the laws of this State relat
ing to trust companies, shall engage in any business other than is
authorized by this act. And whenever it shall appear from the preced
ing-year reports made by such banking corporation that the total depos
its are more than ten times the amount of its paid-up capital and sur
plus, deposits of other banks not included, the bank commissioner shall
have power and it shall be his duty to require such bank within thirty
days to increase its capital or surplus to conform to the provisions of
this act or cease to receive deposits.
S ec . 281. Amount of capital— grades: That hereafter the capital
stock, which shall be fully paid up, shall not be less than 810,000 in
towns having 500 inhabitants or le ss; the capital stock, which shall
be fully paid up, shall not be less than 815.000 in towns having more
than 500 inhabitants and not more than 1,500 inhabitants; the capital
stock, which shall be fully paid up, shall not be less than 825,000 in
cities and towns having more than 1,500 inhabitants and less than
6 000 inhabitants; the capital stock, which shall be fully paid up,
shall not be less than 850,000 in cities having more than 6,000 in
habitants and less than 20,000 inhabitants; the capital stock, which
shall lie fully paid up. shall not be less than 8100,000 in cities having
more than 20,000 inhabitants.
.
S ec . 282. Capital stock may be increased, or decreased, subject to
approval of commissioner: The capital stock of any banking associa
tion doing business under the laws of this State may be increased or
decreased at any time by resolution adopted by three-fourths of its
stockholders at any regular meeting or at a special meeting called for
that purpose, of which all stockholders shall have due notice in the
manner provided by the by-laws of such banking association.
A cer
tificate must be filed with the bank commissioner by the chairman and
secretary of the meeting, and by a majority of all the directors, show
ing the compliance of the provisions of this section, the amount to
which the capital stock has been increased or decreased, the amount
of stock represented at the meeting, and the vote upon the question to
Increase or decrease the capital stock. No such changes in the capital
stock of any such association shall be valid or binding until the same
shall have been approved bv the bank commissioner.
No increase or
the capital stock shall be approved until the amount thereof shall
have been paid in cash : Provided, however, That such increased capital
may, when authorized by all the stockholders of said bank, be paid in
whole or part from Its surplus or undivided profits.
> nenever tne
>
capital stock of any bank shall be decreased as provided in this sec
tion, each stockholder, owner, or holder of any stock certificate shall
29883— 87G0
16
surrender the same for cancellation, and shall he entitled to receive a
new certificate for his proportion of the new stock.
No decrease of
the capital stock of any such bank shall be approved unless such bank
with reduced capital shall be entirely solvent, and no reduction in capi
tal stock shall be approved to an amount less than is authorized by
section 2 of this article (2 7 9 ).
Whenever the capital stock of any
bank shall be increased or decreased, as provided in this section, and
the same shall have been approved by the commissioner, a certificate
signed by the president and cashier of the bank, setting forth the
amount of stock held by each stockholder, shall be filed with the secre
tary of state, with the bank commissioner, and with the corporation
commission.
S e c . 288. Bank to be under control of board of directors : The affairs
and business of any banking association organized under the laws of
this State shall be managed or controlled by a board of directors of not
less than three nor more than thirteen in number, who shall be selected
from the stockholders, at such time and in such manner as may be pro
vided by the by-laws of the association. No person shall be eligible to
serve as director of any bank organized or existing under the laws
of this State unless he shall be a bona fide owner of $500 of the stock
of such bank, fully paid and not hypothecated. Any director, officer, or
other person who shall participate in any violation of the laws of this
State, relative to banks and banking, shall be liable for all damages
which the said bank, its stockholders, depositors, or creditors shall sus
tain in consequence of such violation.
The board shall select from
among their number the president and secretary, and shall select from
among their stockholders a cashier.
Such officers shall hold their
offices for the term of one year and until their successors are elected
and qualified.
The board shall require the cashier and any and all
officers having the care of the funds of the bank to give a good and
sufficient bond, to be approved by them, and held by the state banking
board. The board of directors shall hold at least two regular meetings
each year, and at such meetings a thorough examination of the books,
records, funds, and securities held by the bank shall be made and
recorded in detail upon its record book and a certified copy thereof
shall be forwarded to the bank commissioner and to each stockholder
of record within ten days.
S ec. 284. Removal of officers: Any officer
bank commissioner to be dishonest, reckless,
removed from office by the board of directors
is an officer on the w ritten order of the bank
S ec . 285. renaltv for any violation of la w : The violation of any
of the provisions of this act by the officers or directors of anv bank
organized or existing subject to the laws of this State shall be suf
ficient cause to subject the said bank to be closed and liquidated by the
bank commissioner and for the annulment of its charter.
ec 286. Liability of stockholders : The shareholders of every bank
organized under this act shall be additionally liable for the amount
of stock owned, and no more.
ec 287. Limitation to investm ent: No bank shall employ its moneys,
directly or indirectly, in trade or commerce by buying or selling
goods, chattels, wares, or merchandise, and shall not invest any of
its funds in the stock of any other bank or incorporation, nor make
any loans or discount on the security of the shares of its own capital
stock, nor be the purchaser or holder of any such shares, unless such
securities or purchase shall be necessary to prevent loss upon a debt
previously contracted in good faith, and stock so purchased or acquired
shall, within six months from the time of its purchase, be sold or
disposed of at public or private s a le ; after the expiration of six months,
any such stock shall not be considered as part of the assets of any
b a n k : Provided, That it may sell any personal property which may
come into its possession as collateral security for any debt or obli
gation due it, upon posting a notice in five public places in the county
wherein the property is to be sold, at least ten days before the time
therein specified for such sale, and which said notice shall contain the
name of the bank and the name of the pledgor, the date of the pledge,
the nature of the default and the amount claimed to be due thereon
at the date of the notice, a description of the pledged property to be
sold and the time and place of sale.
ec 288. Reserve required— Depositories— Penalty— Savings associa
tions : Every bank doing business under the laws of this State shall
have on hand at all times in available funds the following sums, to
w i t : Banks located In towns or cities having a population of less than
2,500 persons, an amount equal to 20 per cent of their entire d eposits:
banks located in cities having over 2,500 population, an amount equal
to 25 per cent of their entire d eposits; two-thirds of such amounts may
consist of balances due to them from good, solvent banks, selected from
29883— 8760
S .
S .
sland e v l
2 o f Un|
road bon
r o f ba
outstand
)tion, in
. It is
bond ou
iny purp
nate of
.or whetlfj
nstance II
ys, no, till
in wW
of a bank found by the
or incompetent shall be
of the bank of which he
commissioner.
S .
17
time to time with the approval of the bank commissioner, and one-third
shall consist of actual cash : Provided, That any bank that has been
made the depository for the reserve of any oilier hank or banks shall
have on hand at all times in the manner provided herein 25 per cent
of its deposits.
Whenever the available funds in any bank shall be
below the required amount, such hank shall not increase its liabilities
by making any new loans or discounts otherwise than the discounting
or purchasing bills of exchange payable at sight, nor make any dividends
of its profits until the required proportion between the aggregate amount
of its deposits and its lawful money reserve has been restored ; and the
bank commissioner shall notify any bank whose lawful money reserve
shall be below the amount required to be kept on hand to make good
such reserve, and if such bank or association shall fail to do so for a
period of thirty days after such notice, it shall be deemed to be insol
vent, and the bank commissioner shall take possession of the same and
proceed in the manner provided in this act relating to insolvent hanks ;
the bank commissioner may refuse to consider, as a part of its re
serve, balance due to any hank from any other bank association which
shall refuse or neglect to furnish him with such information as he may
require from time to time relating to its business with any other bank
doing business under this act, which shall enable him to determine its
solvency : Provided, That all savings associations which do not transact
a general banking business shall be required to keep on hand at all
times in actual cash a sum equal to 10 per cent of their deposits, and
shall lie required to keep a like sum invested in good bonds of the
United States or state, county, school district, or municipal bonds of
the State of Oklahoma, worth not less than par.
ec 289. Limit to liabilities to any bank : The total liabilities to any
bank of any person, company, corporation, or firm for money borrowed,
including in the liabilities of the company or firm the liabilities of the
several members thereof, shall not at any time exceed 20 per cent of the
capital stock of such bank,'actually paid in, but the discount of bills of
exchange drawn in good faith against actual existing values as collateral
security and a discount of commercial or business paper actually owned
by the person shall not be considered as money borrowed.
ec 290. Penalty for making a false report: Every officer, director,
agent, or clerk of any bank doing business under the laws of the State
of Oklahoma who willfully and knowingly subscribes to or makes any
false report or any false statement or entries in the book of such banks,
or knowingly subscribes to or exhibits any false writing on paper with
the intent to deceive any person as to the condition of such bank, shall
be deemed guilty of a felony, and shall be punished by a fine not to
exceed $1,000 or by imprisonment in the state prison not exceeding
five years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
ec 291. Officers prevented from borrowing from bank : It shall be
unlawful for any active managing officer of any bank organized or ex
isting under the laws of this State to borrow, directly or indirectly,
money from the bank with which to loan to any of said persons, as well
as the person receiving the same, shall be deemed guilty of a larceny
of the amount borrowed.
S ec . 292. Insolvent bank prevented from receiving deposits— pen
alty : No bank shall accept or receive on deposit, with or without inter
est, any money, bank bills or notes, or United States Treasury notes,
gold or silver certificates, or currency, or other notes, bills, checks, or
drafts, when such bank is insolvent; and any officer, director, cashier,
manager, member, party, or managing party of any bank who shall
knowingly violate the provisions of this section, or be accessory to or
permit or connive at the receiving or accepting of any such deposit, shall
be guilty of a felony, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by
a fine not exceeding $5,000, or by imprisonment in the penitentiary not
exceeding live years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
S ec . 293. None but banks and trust companies to receive deposits:
It shall be unlawful for any individual, firm, or corporation to receive
money upon deposit or transact a banking business except as author
ized by this act, or by the laws relating to trust companies. Any person violating any provisions of this section, either^ individually or as
an interested party, in any association or corporation, shall be guilty
o f a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum
not less than $300 nor more than $1,000, or by imprisonment in the
county jail not less than thirty days nor more than one year, or by
both such n u e and imprisonment.
u o iu » u c u fine a n u m ip r is u u w e u u
.
,
S ec . 294. Reports, quarterly, published : Every bank shall
at
S .
S .
S .
lp fl s t
fo u r
r<unr»i*ta
Pflph vpar
a n rl
o fte n e r
if
c a lle d
UPOD, tO
to e
D&DK
18
priate heads the resources and liabilities of the association at the close
of business on any past day by him specified, and shall be transmitted
to the bank commissioner within ten days after the receipt of a request
or requisition therefor by him, and shall be published in the same form
in which it is made to the bank commissioner within ten days after
the same is made in a newspaper-published in the county in which
such bank is established, for two insertions, at the expense o f the bank ;
and such proof of publication shall be furnished within five days after
date of last publication as may be required by the bank commissioner.
The bank commissioner shall also have power to call for special re
ports from any bank whenever, in his judgment, the same are neces
sary in order to gain a full and complete knowledge of its condition :
Provided, The reports authorized and lequired by this secton to be
called for by the bank commissioner shall relate to a date prior to the
date of such call, to be specified therein.
ec 295. Dividends to be reported: In addition to the reports re
quired by the preceding sections, each bank doing business under this
act shall, within ten days after the declaring of any dividends, for
ward to the bank commissioner a statement of the amount of such divi
dend and the amount carried to the surplus and undivided profit
accounts, and shall forward to the bank commissioner within ten days
after the 1st of January in each year, in such form as he may designate,
a verified statement showing the receipts and disbursements of such
bank for the preceding year.
ec 296. Penalty for failure to make rep o rt: Every bank which fails
to make and transmit or to publish any report required under either of
the two preceding sections shall be subject to a penalty of $50 for each
day after the period respectively therein mentioned that it delays to
make and transmit its report or the proof of publication. Whenever any
bank delays or refuses to pay the penalty herein imposed for a failure to
make and transmit or to publish a report, .the commissioner is hereby
authorized to maintain an action in the name of the State against the
delinquent bank for the recovery of such penalty, and all sums collected
by such action shall be paid into the treasury of the state banking
board.
S ec . 297. Banks may voluntarily place their affairs in hands of com
missioner : Any bank doing business under this act may place its affairs
and assets under the control of the bank commissioner by posting a
notice on its front door as follows : “ This bank is in the hands of
the state bank commissioner.” The posting of such notice or the taking
possession of any bank by the bank commissioner shall be sufficient to
place all of its assets and property of whatever nature in the possession
of the bank commissioner and shall operate as a bar to any attach
ment proceedings.
• ec 298. Banks may voluntarily liquidate : Any bank doing business
under this act may voluntarily liquidate by paying off all its depositors
in full, and upon filing a verified statement with the bank commissioner
setting forth the fact that all its liabilities have been paid, and the sur
rendering of its certificate of authority to transact a banking business,
it shall cease to be subject to the provisions of this act and may con
tinue to transact a loan and discount business under its charter : Pro
vided, That the bank commissioner shall make an examination of any
such bank for the purpose of determining that all its liabilities have
been paid.
S ec . 299. Banks— when deemed insolvent: A bank shall be deemed to
be insolvent, first, when the actual cash market value of its assets is
insufficient to pay its liab ilities; second, when it is unable to meet the
demands of its creditors in the usual and customary m anner; third,
when it shall fail to make good its reserve as required by law.
ec 300. Dividends and surplus funds— declared when : The direct
ors or owners of any bank doing business under this act may declare
dividends of so much of the net profits of their bank as they shall judge
expedient, but each bank shall, before the declaration of a dividend,
carry not less than one-tenth of its net profits since the last preceding
dividend to its surplus fund, until the same shall amount to 50 per
cent of its capital stock : Provided, That such dividends, if any, shall
be declared on the first day of January and the first day of July of
each year, and it shall be reported to the bank commissioner on forms
prescribed by him.
ec 301. Losses charged to surplus account: Any losses sustained
by any bank in excess of its undivided profits may be charged to its
surplus account: Provided, That its surplus fund shall thereafter be
reimbursed from its earnings, and no dividend shall be declared or
paid by any such bank until its surplus fund shall be fully restored to
its former amount.
ec 302. When dividends may be declared: No bank officer or di
rector thereof shall, during the time it shall continue its banking op29883— 8760
S .
S .
S .
S .
sland e j
of Unj
road boil
r of baL
outstamf
)tion, in If
2
. It is
bond ot
my purr
nate of
or wbet
ustance
ys, no, t
S .
S .
19
erations, withdraw or permit to be withdrawn, either in the form of
dividends or otherwise, any portion of its capital.
If losses have been
at any time sustained by such bank equal to or exceeding its undi
vided profits then on hand, no dividend shall be made, and no divi
dend shall be declared by any bank while it continues its banking
business to any amount greater than its profits on hand, deducting
therefrom its losses, to be ascertained by a careful estimate of the
actual cash value of all its assets at the time of making such dividends.
The present worth of all maturing paper shall be estimated at the
usual discount rate of the bank. Nothing in this section shall prevent
the reduction of the capital stock of any bank in the manner prescribed
herein.
S ec . 303. Penalty for any bank official to fail to perform d uties:
Every banker, officer, employee, director, or agent of any bank who shall
neglect to perform any duty required by this act, or who shall fail to
conform to any lawful requirements made by the bank commissioner,
shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and upon conviction thereof shall
be punished by a fine not to exceed $1,000, or by imprisonment in the
penitentiary not to exceed five years, or by both such fine and im
prisonment.
ec 304. Rewards may be offered and p a id : The state banking
board shall have power to offer and pay out of the depositors’ guaranty
fund, under such conditions as it may deem proper, and not to exceed
the sum of $500 in any one case, rewards for the arrest and conviction
of any officer, agent, director, or employee of any bank charged' with
violating any of the laws of this State relating to banks and banking
for which a criminal penalty is provided, or for the arrest and con
viction of any person charged with stealing, with or without force, any
money, property, or thing of value of any bank.
ec 305. Certified checks must be drawn— h o w : It shall be unlawful
for any officer, clerk, or agent of any bank doing business under this
act to certify any check, draft, or order drawn upon the bank unless
the person, firm, or corporation drawing such check, draft, or order has
on deposit with the bank at the time such check, draft, or order is
certified an amount of money equal to the amount specified in such
check. Any check, draft, or order so certifled by the duly authorized
officer shall be a good and valid obligation against any such bank, but
the officer, clerk, or agent of any bank violating the provisions of this
section shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and upon conviction shall
be punished as provided in this act.
ec 306. Penalty for embezzlement: Every president, director, cashier,
teller, clerk, officer, or agent of any jtank who embezzles, abstracts, or
willfully misapplies any of the moneys, funds, securities, or credits of
the bank, or who issues or puts forth any certificate of deposit, draws
any draft or bill of exchange, makes any acceptance, assigns any note,
bond, draft, bill of exchange, mortgage, judgment, or decree, or who
makes use of the bank in any manner with intent in either ca>e to
injure or defraud the bank or any individual, person, company, or
corporation, or to deceive any officer of the bank, and any person who,
with like intent, aids or abets any officer, clerk, or agent in any viola
tion of this section, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and upon con
viction thereof shall be punished as provided in this act.
ec 307 Penalty to pay overdrafts : Any bank officer or employee
who shall pay out the funds of any bank upon the check, order, or draft
of any individual, firm, corporation, or association which has not on
deposit with such bank a sum equal to such check, order, or draft
shall be personally liable to such bank for the amount so paid, and
such liabilities shall be Covered by his official bond.
ec 308. Banks may borrow m oney: No bank, banker, or bank
official shall give preference to any depositor or creditor by pledging
the assets of the bank as collateral security: Provided, That any bank
may borrow money for temporary purposes, not to exceed in amount 50
per cent of its paid-up capital, and may pledge assets of the bank as
collateral security therefor: Provided further, That whenever it shall
appear that a bank is borrowing habitually for the purpose of reloan
ing the bank commissioner may require such bank to pay off such bor
rowed money. Nothing herein shall prevent any bank from rediscount
ing in good faith and indorsing any of its negotiable notes.
ec 309. Impairment of capital sto c k : Whenever it shall appear
that the capital of any bank doing business under this act had become
impaired the bank commissioner shall notify such bank to make such
impairment good within sixty days, and it shall be the duty of the
officers and directors of any bank receiving such notice from the hank
commissioner to immediately call a special meeting of its stockholders
for the purpose of levying an assessment upon its stockholders sufficient
to cover the requirements of its capital sto c k : Provided, That such
bank, if not insolvent, may reduce its capital stock to the extent of such
29883— 8760
S .
S .
S .
S
S .
S .
20
impairment, if such reduction will not place its capital below the
amount required by this a c t : And provided further, That the bank shall
have a prior lien upon the stock of each individual shareholder to the
extent of such assessment, and upon the failure of any such stock
holder to pay the assessment authorized by this section within the time
fixed by the bank commissioner for making good said impairment said
lien may be foreclosed and the stock of such delinquent stockholder
sold by giving public notice of the time and place of such sale, and of
the stock to be sold, by advertisement for fifteen days in some news
paper of general circulation published in the county where such bank is
located.
ec 310. National banks may become state banks: Any national
bank doing business in this State may incorporate as a state bank, as
provided herein for the organization of banks : Provided, That the bank
commissioner may accept good assets of such national bank worth not
less than par in lieu of cash payment for the stock of such state bank.
Sec . 311. Bank to keep list of its shareholders: The president and
cashier of every incorporated bank shall cause to be kept at all times
a full and correct list of the names and residences of all the share
holders in the bank and the number of shares held by each in the office
where its business is transacted. Such list shall be subject to the in
spection of all the shareholders and creditors of the bank and the
officers authorized to assess taxes under the state authority during
business hours of each day in which business may be legally transacted.
A copy of such list on the first Monday in January of each year, verified
by the oath of such president or cashier, shall be transmitted to the
bank commissioner.
ec 312. Commissioner may revoke charter of any bank for cause:
Whenever an officer of the bank shall refuse to submit the books, papers,
and effects of such bank to the inspection of the commissioner or his
assistant, or shall in any manner obstruct or interfere with him in the
discharge of his duties, or refuse to be examined on oath touching the
affairs of the bank, the commissioner may revoke the authority of such
bank to transact a banking business and proceed to wind up its business.
ec 313. When real estate may be purchased and sold : Any officer
of any bank whose authority to transact a banking business has been
revoked, as herein provided, who shall receive or cause to be received
any deposit of whatsoever nature after such revocation, shall be subject
to the same penalty provided for persons transacting a banking business
without authority.
S ec . 314. Real estate— How conveyed: A bank may purchase, hold,
and convey real estate for the following purposes : First, such as shall
be necessary for the convenient transaction of its business, including
its furniture and fixtures, but which shall not exceed one-third of the
paid-in c a p ita l; second, such as shall be conveyed to it in satisfaction
of debts previously contracted in the course of its business; third, such
as it shall purchase at sale under judgment, decree, or mortgage fore
closures under securities held by i t ; but a bank shall not bid at any
such sale a larger amount than enough to satisfy its debts and costs.
Real estate shall be conveyed under the corporate seal of the bank and
the hands of its president or vice-president and cashier.
No real
estate acquired in the cases contemplated in the second and third sub
sections above shall be held for a longer time than five years. It must
be sold at a private or public sale within thirty days thereafter.
ec 315. Shares— Deemed personal property : The shares of stock
of an incorporated bank shall be deemed personal property, and shall
be transferred on the books of the bank in such manner as the by-laws
therefor may direct, but no transfer of stock shall be valid against a
bank or any creditor thereof so long as the registered holder thereof
shall be liable as a principal debtor, surety, or otherwise to the bank
for any debt, nor in such cases shall any dividend, interest, or profits
be paid on said stock so long as such liabilities continue, but all such
dividends, interests, or profits shall be retained by the bank and ap
plied to the discharge of such liability, and no stock shall be trans
ferred on the books of any bank where the registered holder thereof
is in debt to the bank for any matured and unpaid obligations.
S ec . 316. Bank can not loan on its stock : It shall be unlawful for
any bank to loan its funds to its stockholders on their stock on collat
eral security, and the total indebtedness of the stockholders of any
incorporated' bank shall at no time exceed 50 per cent of its paid-up
ca p ita l: Provided, That any bank may hold its stock to secure a debt
previously contracted.
ec 317. Commissioner to preserve records: For the purpose of
carrying into effect the provisions of this act, the bank commissioner
shall provide a form for the necessary blanks for such examinations
and reports: and all examinations and reports received by him shall
be preserved in his office.
29883— 8760
S .
S .
S .
S .
S .
21
S e c . 318. Penalty for false swearing : Every officer or employee of a
bank required by this act to take an oath or affirmation who shall w ill
fully swear or affirm falsely shall be deemed guiltv of perjury, and,
upon conviction thereof, shall be punished as provided by the laws of
this State in case of perjury.
A
B A N K IN G
r t ic l e
II.
BOARD-----GUARANTY
F IN 'D .
S e c . 319. State banking board— who com pose: The state banking
board shall be composed of the governor, lieutenant-governor, the presi
dent of the board of agriculture, state treasurer, and state auditor.
Said board shall have the supervision and management of the de
positors’ guaranty fund, hereinafter provided for, and shall have power
to adopt all suitable rules and regulations not inconsistent with law
for the management and administration of the same.
S e c . 320. Assessment for guaranty fu n d : There is hereby levied an
assessment against the capital stock of each and every bank and trust
company organized or existing under the laws of this State for the
purpose of creating a depositor’s guaranty fund equal to 5 per cent of
Its average daily deposits during its continuance in business as a bank
ing corporation. Said assessments shall be payable one-fifth during the
first year and one-twentieth during each year thereafter until the total
amount of said 5 per cent assessment shall have been fully p a id :
Provided, however, That the assessments heretofore levied and paid by
banking corporations or trust companies now existing shall be deducted
from and credited as a payment on said 5 per cent assessment hereby
levied. The average daily deposits of each bank during the preceding
year prior to the passage and approval of this act shall be taken as the
basis for computing the amount of the first payment on the levy hereby
made. One year after the passage and approval of this act, and annu
ally thereafter, each bank and trust company doing business under the
laws of this State shall report to the bank commissioner the amount of
its average daily deposits for the preceding year, and if such deposits
are in excess of the amount upon which the first or subsequent pay
ment of the levy hereby made is computed, each bank or trust company
having such increased deposits shall immediately pay in the depositors'
guaranty fund a sum sufficient to pay any deficiency on said first or
subsequent payment, as shown by such increased deposits. After the 5
per cent assessment hereby levied shall have been fully paid up no
additional assessments shall be levied or collected against the capital
stock of any such bank or trust company, except emergency assessments
hereinafter provided, to pay the depositors of failed banks, and except
assessments as may be necessary by reason of increased deposits to
maintain such funds at 5 per cent of the aggregate of all deposits in
such banks and trust companies doing business under the laws of this
State.
Whenever the depositors’ guaranty fund shall become impaired
or be reduced below said 5 per cent by reason of payments to depositors
of failed banks the state banking board shall have the power, and it
shall be their duty, to levy emergency assessments against the capital
stock of each bank and trust company doing business in this State suffi
cient to restore said impairment or reduction below 5 per c e n t; but the
aggregate of such emergency assessments shall not in any one calendar
year exceed 2 per cent of the average daily deposits of all such banks
and trust companies. If the amount realized from such emergency as
sessments shall be insufficient to pay off the depositors of all failed
banks having valid claims against said depositors' guaranty fund, the
state banking board shall issue and deliver to each depositor having
any such unpaid deposit a certificate of indebtedness for the amount of
the unpaid deposit bearing 6 per cent interest.
Such certificates shall
be consecutively numbered and shall be payable upon the call of the
state banking board in like manner as state warrants are paid by the
state treasurer in the order of their issue out of the emergency* levy
thereafter m ad e; and the state banking board shall from year to year
levy emergency assessments as hereinbefore provided against the cap
ital stock of all banking corporations and trust companies doing busi
ness in this State until all such certificates of indebtedness, with the
accrued Interest thereon, shall have been fully paid. As rapidly as the
assets of failed banks are liquidated and realized upon by the bank com
missioner the same shall be applied first after the payment of the ex
pense of liquidation to the repayment to the depositors’ guaranty fund
of all money paid out of said fund to the depositors of such failed
bank, and shall be applied by the state banking board toward refunding
any emergency assessment levied by reason of the failure of such liqui
dated bank : Provided, further, That 75 per cent of the depositors’ guar29883— 8760
| 01
i
anty fund shall be invested for the benefit of said fund in state warrants
or such other securities as state funds are now required to be invested.
S ec . 320. Assessment for guaranty fund : There is hereby levied an
assessment of 1 per cent of the bank's daily average deposits, less the
deposits of the United States, and state funds, if otherwise secured,
for the preceding year, upon each and every bank and trust company
organized or existing under the laws of this State, for the purpose of
creating a depositors’ guaranty fund.
Said assessment shall be col
lected upon call of the state banking board.
In one year from the
time the first assessment is levied, and annually thereafter, each bank
and trust company subject to the provisions of this act shall report to
the bank commissioner the amount of its average daily deposits for the
preceding y e a r; and if such deposits are in excess of the amount upon
which 1 per cent was previously paid, said report shall be accompanied
by additional funds to equal 1 per cent of the daily average excess of
deposits, less the deposits of the United States Government for the
year over the preceding year, and each amount shall be added to the
depositors’ guaranty fund.
If the depositors' guaranty fund is de
pleted from any cause it shall be the duty of the state banking board,
in order to keep said fund up to 1 per cent of the total deposits in all
of the said banks and trust companies subject to the provisions of this
act, to levy a special assessment to cover such deficiency, which spe
cial assessment shall be levied upon the capital stock of the banks and
trust companies subject to this act, according to the amount of their
deposits as reported in the office of the bank commissioner. And such
special assessment shall become immediately due and payable.
ec 321. New banks to pay 3 per cent on capital s to c k ; Bank
and trust companies organized subsequent to the enactment of this act
shall pay into the depositors’ guaranty fund 3 per cent of the amount
of their capital stock when they open for business, which amount shall
constitute a credit fund, subject to adjustment on the basis of its de
posits, as provided for other banks and trust companies now existing at
the end of one y e a r : Provided, however, That said 3 per cent payment
shall not be required of new banks and trust companies formed by the
reorganization or consolidation of banks and trust companies that have
previously complied with the terms of this act.
S ec . 322. Commissioner to close up business of insolvent b an k s:
Whenever any bank or trust company organized or existing under the
laws of this State shall voluntarily place itself in the hands of the
bank commissioner, or whenever any judgment shall be rendered bv a
court of competent jurisdiction, adjudging and decreeing that such bank
or trust company is insolvent, or whenever its rights or franchises to
conduct a banking business under the laws of this State shall have
been adjudged to he forfeited, or whenever the bank commissioner shall
become satisfied of the insolvency of any such bank or trust company.
he may, after due examination of its affairs, take possession of said
bank or trust company and its assets and proceed to wind up its
affairs and enforce the personal liability of the stockholders, officers,
and directors.
ec 323. Depositors to be paid in full from guaranty fund— Lien on
a sse ts: In the event that the bank commissioner shall take possession
of any bank or trust company which is subject to the provisions o f this
act, the depositors of said bank or trust company shall be paid in f u l l ;
and when the cash available, or that can be made immediately available,
o f said bank or trust company is insufficient to discharge its obligations
to depositors, the banking board shall draw from the depositors' guar
anty fund and from additional assessments, if required, as provided in
section 2, the amount necessary to make up the deficiency, and the
State shall have for the benefit of the depositors' guaranty fund a first
lien upon the assets o f said bank or trust company and all liabilities
against the stockholders, officers, and directors of said bank or trust
company against all other persons, corporations, or firms.
Such lia
bilities may lie enforced by the State for the benefit of the depositors'
guaranty fund.
ec 324. Commisioner to take charge: The bank commission shall
take possession of the books, records, and assets of every description of
such bank or trust company, collect debts, dues, and claims belonging
to it, and upon order of the district court or judge thereof mnv sell or
compound all bad or doubtful debts, and on like order may sell all the
real or personal property of such bank or trust company upon such
terms as the court or judge thereof may direct, and may, if necessary,
pay the debts of such bank or trust company and enforce the liabilities
o f the stockholders, officers, and directors: Provided, however, That bad
or doubtful debts as used in this section shall not include the liability
of stockholders, officers, and directors.
29883— 8760
S .
S .
1 amo
.e ou
>unt
S .
S e c . 325. Certificate of com pliance: The bank commissioner shall
deliver to each bank or trust company that has complied with the pro
visions of this act a certificate stating that said bank or trust company
had complied with the laws of this State for the protection of bank
depositors, and that safety to its depositors is guaranteed by the de
positors’ guaranty fund of the State of Oklahoma.
Such certificate
shall be conspicuously displayed in its place of business, and said bank
or trust company may print or engrave upon its stationery and adver
tising matter w
rords to the effect that its depositors are protected by
the depositors’ guaranty fund of the State of Oklahoma : Provided, how
ever, That hereafter all banks operating under the guaranty law of the
State of Oklahoma shall be permitted to advertise that their deposits
are guaranteed by the depositors' guaranty fund, but that no bank
shall be permitted to advertise its deposits as guaranteed by the State
of Oklahoma, and any bank or bank officer or employee who shall ad
vertise their deposits as guaranteed by the State of Oklahoma shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be pun
ished’ by a fine not exceeding .$500. or by imprisonment in the county
jail for thirty days, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the dis
cretion of the trial court.
S e c . 326. Stockholders may repair lo ss: A fter the bank commissioner
shall have taken possession of any bank or trust company which is sub
ject to the provisions of this act, the stockholders thereof may repair
its credit, restore or substitute its reserves, and otherwise place it in
condition so that it is qualified to do a general banking business as be
fore it was taken possession of by the bank commissioners ; but such
bank shall not be permitted to reopen its business until the bank com
missioner, after a careful investigation of its affairs, is of the opinion
that its stockholders have complied with the laws, that the bank’s
credit and funds are in all respects repaired, and all advances, if any,
made from the depositors’ guaranty fund fully repaid, its reserve re
stored or sufficiently substituted, and that it should be permitted again
to reopen for business, whereupon said bank commissioner is authorized
to issue written permission for reopening of said bank in the same
manner as permission to do business is granted after the incorporation
thereof, and thereupon said bank may be reopened to do a general bank
ing business.
S e c . 327. Guaranteed banks may become state depositories : Any bank
or trust company which has complied with the provisions of this act
shall be eligible to act as a depository of state funds, of any fund under
the control of the State or any officer thereof, upon compliance with
the laws of this State relating to the deposits of public funds.
S e c . 328. State and county depositories: Any bank duly organized
under and in compliance with the laws o f this State relating to banks
and banking corporations and doing business in the State of Oklahoma,
or any national bank organized under the laws of the United States
and doing business in the State of Oklahoma, shall be qualified to be
come state and county depositories, when so designated according to
law, by giving securities by the depositing with the proper state or
county officers United States bonds or state bonds or general-fund state
warrants or state special-fund warrants, or approved county or munici
pal bonds in the State, or approved county or school district warrants
in the State, and the proper officers are hereby authorized and empow
ered to contract accordingly.
A rticle III.
BA N K C O M M IS S IO N E R .
S e c . 320. Commissioner to be appointed by governor: The governor
shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, a bank
commissioner, who shall hold office for the term of four years and until
his successor is appointed and qualified. No officer or employee of any
bank or any person interested as owner or stockholder of any bank shall
be eligible to the office of bank com missioner: Provided, That no person
shall be appointed as bank commissioner who shall not have had, prior
to such appointment, at least three years’ practical experience as a
banker.
S e c . 330. Commissioner to give b o n d : The bank commissioner shall,
before entering upon the discharge of his duties, take and subscribe
the usual oath of office and execute to the State of Oklahoma a bond
in the sum of $25,000, with sufficient surety, for the faithful perform
ance of his duty, to be approved and filed as provided by law.
S e c . 331. Ranks must be examined twice each y e a r :-I t shall be the
duty of the bank commissioner, or one of his assistants, to visit each
and every bank pr trust company subject to the provisions of this act
29883— 8760
24
at least twice each year, and oftener if he deems it advisable, for the
purpose of making a full and careful examination and inquiry into the
condition of the affairs of such bank, and for that purpose' the bank
commissioner and his assistant are hereby authorized and empowered
to administer oaths, and to examine under oath the stockholders and
directors and all officers and employees and agents of such banks, or
other persons. The commissioner shall reduce the result thereof to
writing, which shall contain a full, true, and careful statement of the
condition of such bank or trust company, and file and retain the same in
his office.
ec 332. Salary— positions created : The bank commissioner’s salary
shall be $2,500 per annum and traveling expenses. There is hereby
created and established eight positions, each position to be known as an
assistant to the bank commissioner, and to be filled by appointment by
the bank commissioner, subject to the approval of the governor, and
the salary of each said assistant to the bank commissioner shall be
$ 1,800 per annum and traveling expenses.
ec 333. Fee for examination : Each and every bank so examined
having not more than $15,000 capital stock paid in shall pay a fee of
$ 1 5 'for each and every exam ination; and each and every bank having
more than $ 15,000 capital stock paid in and not more' than $25,000
paid in shall pay a fee of $ 2 0 : and each and every bank having more
than $ 25,000 capital stock paid in and not more than $40,000 capital
stock paid in shall pay a fee of $25 ; and each and every bank having
more than $40,000 capital stock paid in and not more than $50,000
capital stock paid in, shall pay a fee of $ 3 0 ; and each and every bank
having more than $50,000 capital stock paid in shall pay a fee of $35
to the commissioner.
ec 334. Fees to be paid into state treasury : It shall be the duty
of the bank commissioner to pay over to the treasurer of the state
banking board all fees collected by him, and said banking board shall
use the same, or so much thereof as may be necessary, in paying the
expenses incurred in making examination of banks, subject to any of the
banking laws of this State, and other expenses incurred by said banking
board in the administration of said depositors’ guaranty fund.
ec 335. Special reports may be required: The bank commissioner
shall have power at any time when he deems it necessary to call upon
any bank or trust company organized under the laws of this State, and
upon any national bank whose depositors are protected by the deposi
tors' guaranty fund, for a report of its condition upon any given day
which is passed, or as often as the bank commissioner may deem it
necessary : Provided, That he shall require at least four such reports
during each and every calendar year. A copy of each call made by the
bank commissioner shall be mailed to each such bank.
ec 336. Commissioner may be removed from office: Ank bank com
missioner or assistant bank commissioner who shall neglect to perform
any duty provided for by this act, or who shall make any false state
ment concerning any bank, or who shall be guilty of any misconduct or
corruption in office, shall, upon conviction thereof, be deemed guilty of
a felony and punished in the manner provided in this act, and in addi
tion thereto shall be removed from office.
ec 337. County attorney to enforce law : It shall be the duty of the
bank commissioner to inform the county attorney of the county in which
the bank is located of any violation of any of the provisions of this
act, which constitutes a misdemeanor or felony, by the officers, owners,
or employees of any bank, and upon receipt of such information the
county attorney shall institute proceedings to enforce the provisions of
this act.
S ec . 338. Repealing c la u se ; A ll acts and parts of acts in conflict
herewith are hereby repealed.
ec 339. Bank— what constitutes; Any individual, firm, or corpora
tion who shall receive money on deposit, whether on certificates or sub
ject to check, shall be considered as doing a banking business and shall
be amenable to all the provisions of this a c t : ProvUied, That promissoiw
notes issued for money received on deposit shall be held to be certifi
cates of deposit for the purpose of this a c t
29883— 8760
S .
S .
S .
S .
S .
S .
S .
o
%tmil
SIXTY-FIRST CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION.
Department of Public Health.
S P E E C H
EON.
ROBERT
OP
L.
OWEN,
O K L A H O M A ,
I n the Senate of the U nited States,
Thursday, March 2k, 1910.
„l h« ®enat® havIn,S under consideration the bill (S. 6049)
a department o f public health, and fo r other purposes—
establishing
Mr. OWEN sa id :
Mr. P resident : For years I have deeply desired to see laws
passed by the United States which would render efficient and
coordinate its agencies for the preservation of the public health,
and in this way promote the protection o f our people against
the preventable death and disease, which not only has greatly
impaired the working efficiency of the American people, imposed
hundreds of millions of dollars o f unnecessary costs upon the
federal Treasury, but has prevented an increase in our popu
lation of many millions o f people. All other bills and adminis
tration measures, however urgent, are, in my opinion, o f minor
importance compared to this subject of gigantic national interest.
I ho I resident o f the United States takes a deep concern in
this matter. He has frequently declared his desire to have
all health and sanitary agencies o f the Government brought
together in one efficient body. He has expressed no objection
to a department o f public health, and I feel authorized to say
so, but without committing himself to a department or a bu
reau, as preferring one to the other, he has vigorously expressed
biniself i u favor o f the concentration o f all these health and
sanitary agencies into one coordinate efficient body.
Mr. President, the people of the United States suffer a pre
ventable loss o f over G O
O ,000 lives per annum, a daily senseless
sacrifice o f an army o f over 1,700 human beings every day of
tfie year, over one a minute from one year’s end to another, and
year after year. This terrible loss might be prevented by rea
sonable safeguards under the cooperation of the federal and
state authorities, each within strict constitutional limits and
with an expenditure that is utterly trivial in comparison with its
benefits.
These proven table deaths are caused by polluted water, im
pure find . u tQ ated food and drugs, epidemics, various pre
ventable diseases—tuberculosis, typhoid and malarial fevers—
unclean cities, and bad sanitation.
Measuring the money value o f an American citizen at Si 700
this preventable loss by death alone is one thousand millions of
dollars annually, equal to the gross income o f the United States
Government.
There are 3,000,000 people seriously sick all the time in the
United States from preventable causes, o f whom 1,000,000 are in
the working period o f life ; about three-quarters o f a million
actual workers losing on an average o f $700 per annum, an ap
proximate loss from illness o f five hundred millions, and adding
a reasonable allowance for medicine, medical attendance, special
food and care, a like sum o f five hundred millions, these losses
would make another thousand million dollars o f preventable loss
to the people of the United States.
AUTHO RITX FOB FACTS STATED.
Do you Imagine that these figures are exaggerated or fan
ciful, Mr. President? They are confirmed to us by the report
of the Committee of One Hundred on National Health in Its Re
port on National Vitality. (Bulletin No. 30, p. 12.) This bul-
3 5 5 4 0 — 8883
letin was prepared by Prof. Irving Fisher, professor of political
economy of Yale University, with the assistance of some of the
most learned men in the whole world, including Prof. Lafayette B.
Mendel, of Sheffield Scientific School of Yale University; Prof.
M. V. O’ Shea, University of Wisconsin; Dr. Charles W. Stiles,
a chief of the hygienic laboratory of the United States Public
Health and Marine-Hospital Service; Robert M. O’Reilly, for
mer Surgeon-General of the United States Arm y; Prof. C. R.
Henderson, University o f Chicago; and the officials of the Va
rious public-health societies and of the American Medical Asso
ciation; Dr. George M. Kober, dean of the Georgetown Medical
College; Dr. Norman E. Ditman, Columbia University; Dr. J.
H. Kellogg, of Battle Creek; Hiram J. Messenger, actuary of
the Travelers’ Insurance Company, and so forth.
Mr. President, our pension roll of over $150,000,000 per
annum is three-fourths of it due to illness and death from dis
eases that were preventable. Under a wise administration in
the past the United States would to-day be saving an annual
charge of over $100,000,000 on the pension list, and would have
saved under this heading over $2,000,000,000 and much human
misery and pain.
Will you fail to listen when your attention is called to the
vast importance of this matter and to the high standing of tht” c
who vouch for the accuracy and reliability of this statement?
W ill you, as the representatives of the people of the United
States, fail to investigate and to act in a matter of such conse
quence?
There are the vital facts.
There are the authorities.
ORIGIN OF BILL
G049.
Mr. President, nine years ago I had the importance of this sub
ject called to my attention by an article read before the Cincin
nati Academy o f Medicine, October 7, 1901, on “ Preventable
disease in the Army of the United States— cause, effect, and
remedy,” by Maj. William O. Owen, a surgeon in the United
States Army, printed in the Journal o f the American Medical
Association October 26, 1901, where he pointed out over 19,000
cases o f typhoid fever in four camps—Chickamauga, Alger,
Meade, and Jacksonville—with 1,460 deaths of the finest young
men of America, nearly all o f which was a preventable loss.
The typhoid cases, with resultant deaths, were due to ignoring
the laws of sanitation. (Exhibit 9.) I drew this bill (S. 6049)
in the hope o f cooperating with the administration in making
effective the most important o f all forms of conservation—the
conservation of human life— and in the hope of making effective
the expressed desires of the numerous associations and societies
of the United States who stand for a department of public
health.
Mr. President, since introducing this bill I have been receiv
ing letters from the most distinguished men in the United
States indorsing th e p rin cip le uf tlie bill a n d exp re ssin g the
earnest opinion that the time has come for establishing a de*
partment of public health.
I quote here from an article in the Survey, o f New York—
formerly the Charities and Commons— published by the Sage
Foundation, March 19, 1910, page 938:
So when Senator O w e n introduces into the Senate o f the United
State’s the first really adequate bill to meet the problem o f the conser
vation o f our wasted national health— a bill for the establishm ent o f a
national department o f health under a secretary who shall be clothed
with the prestige and the authority o f membership in the President’ s
Cabinet— when such a bill is presented to Congress, the old cry goes up
from every quarter— the time is not ripe. But there are those who re
fuse to believe this, w ho know the time is overripe, some who even put
it with Marceilus, that “ som ething is rotten with the S tate.”
The principle o f the Owen bill is right.
So says the American
M edical Association, w ith its thousands o f p h y sician s; so says the
Committee o f One hundred, with its thousands o f men «n d women
awake to the shortcom ings o f the m ultiplicity o f governm ent bureaus,
2
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
each doing a little, some doing more, some doing less, and not all to
gether doing a tithe of what needs to be done, and what coordina
tion, consolidation, and unification in one great department could do.
“ The-time-is-not-ripe ” Congressmen will be content to repeat on and on
until each awakes to the fact that his constituents believe that the
time is ripe. Personal interviews, letters, telegrams, resolutions, peti
tions, newspaper articles, should go, and go at once, to the Senators and
Representatives of each man and woman who refuses longer to be put
off in favor of protected trees, plants, and p ig s ; who believes in a pro
tecting department of health as much as in a protecting Department of
Agriculture.
The authorities are agreed that with our present knowledge the death
rate of the people of this country may be cut in two. It is time the
thing were done.
The time is ripe for radicals, reformers, whatever
their other creeds, philanthropists, charity workers, rich or poor,
founded or without funds, to get together and to state squarely and
openly, without equivocation, what is needed and what is demanded.
Until then, always we shall hear, “ The time is not ripe.”
Hon. R. A. Woodward, president of the Carnegie Institution,
of Washington, says in a letter of February 23, 1910:
I have examined this bill with care and am disposed to approve its
general features heartily.
The bill of which I speak, Senate bill 6049, simply provides
a secretary of public health, and is a skeleton bill, bringing
together under the department of public health all the health
and sanitary agencies of the United States.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from New Hampshire?
Mr. OWEN. I do.
Mr. GALLINGER. Will the Senator tell me why the army
and navy are excluded from the bill? The Senator a moment
ago complained about the mortality at Chickamauga. That
was under the War Department.
Mr. OWEN. I will answer briefly as to that point, Mr.
President, that it is because o f their possible political opposi
tion that the bill excluded them.
Mr. GALLINGER. I do not see what political activities
have to do with the question of human life and health.
Mr. OWEN. It has this to do with it: That it would be
probably impossible to pass a bill with the hostile opposition of
these who are connected with the medical service o f the army
and the navy; and, moreover, the departments of health in the
War and Navy departments, being particularly attendant upon
the military arm of the Government, may be excluded from a
department of public health, although I do not think they ought
to be. I think that the Japanese have set an example to the
Americans that they might well follow, where their medical
men go ahead of their military forces and take pains to see
that the soldiers of Japan have clean water and clean fo o d ; and
they do not die like flies from typhoid fever.
Mr. GALLINGER. Now, Mr. President, if the Senator will
permit me, I am not going to quarrel with him on that point-----Mr. OWEN. I am sure the Senator will not quarrel with me
on any point.
Mr. GALLINGER. I quite agree with the Senator. But my
attention was particularly attracted to the Senator’s observa
tion that we sacrificed—I have forgotten how many thousand—
soldiers at Chickamauga.
Mr. OWEN. In that camp alone were 11,837 cases of pre
ventable typhoid fever, and 850 young men died there, who
ought not to have died—not a single one of them, and typhoid
fever scattered broadcast by those going home, convalescent or
sick.
Mr. GALLINGER. Because of improper medical supervision?
Mr. OWEN. No, sir; because of improper conduct by the
officers of the line who were responsible for that camp.
Mr. GALLINGER. But the Senator must know that the med
ical officers are responsible for the condition of the hospitals
and the food and drink, and so forth.
Mr. OWEN. They are emphatically not, although they ought
to be, because, Mr. President-----Mr. GALLINGER. Well-----Mr. OWEN. Just a moment. Because, under oi.r intelligent
method of administration, a lieutenant in command can turn
down a man learned in the sanitary sciences and make his
orders of no effect.
Mr. GALLINGER. I want to get to that particular point, and
I want the Senator to address himself to that. It does not
make any difference whether they are officers of the line or
medical officers, if that condition exists under the War Depart
ment, why should not that department be placed', under the
supervision of the department which the Senator proposes to
organize?
Mr. OWEN. Does the Senator favor that?
Mr. GALLINGER. Do I favor what?
Mr. OWEN. Putting them under this department.
# 5546— 8883
Mr. GALLINGER. I am not at all sure that I favor the bill
at all, but I was anxious to find out-----Mr. OWEN. I was hoping that I had found an auxiliary In
the Senator.
Mr. GALLINGER. The Senator will find that out later.
This is what I am anxious to find out. The Senator wants
to save our soldiers and complains that the medical officers and
the line officers are neglecting them in matters of health, and
yet in organizing this great department of health he is going
to exclude them. I can not see the philosophy of the Senator’s
position.
Mr. OWEN. I have explained the philosophy of it to the
Senator. I will say that when a department of public health
is once established and it sets a standard of sanitary science
and of public health, whether the department of medicine and
surgery in the military arm of the Government be put in the
department of public health or not, this department will exer
cise a cogent influence over the practice of all departments
affecting the public health, including the department having in
charge the health of our soldiers and our sailors.
Now, Mr. President, I want to call attention to some few of
the distinguished men who have reported their approval of a
department of public health, including particularly Prof. Irving
Fisher, the professor of political economy of Yale University,
and president of the committee of one hundred.
Col. W. C. Gorgas, United States Army, chief sanitary officer
of Panama, says in letter of March 4, 1910:
I am very much in favor of some bill of this kind, which will bring
all medical services of the Government, with the exception of the army
any navy, under one head, elevated to the position of a department,
with a member of the Cabinet at its head.
Hiram J. Messenger, actuary of the Travelers’ Insurance
Company, of Hartford, Conn., says:
I sincerely hope this bill will become a law.
The principle of this bill has the cordial approval and sup
port of the officers o f the American Medical Association, with a
direct and associated membership of 80,000 physicians, sur
geons, and sanitary experts.
Irving Fisher, president of the committee of one hundred of
the American Association for the Advancement of Science on
National Health, approves the principle of Senate bill 6049 of
a department of public health with a Cabinet officer at the head
of it.
Hon. Joseph Y. Porter, state health officer of Florida, the
oldest health officer, perhaps, in the United States by actual
service, says:
Assuming that you wish an expression of opinion on the features of
the bill, I shall take the privilege of saying that I fear, even should the
bill meet with success m passing both houses of the Congress, the
President would veto the measure because he has expressed himself—
so reported in the press— as opposed to creating any new departments.
I am certainly in favor of a department of public health and approve
of your bill as presented to Congress, but if the President is correctly
quoted I can see no likelihood of such an enactment being accepted by
him, and becoming a law.
Mr. President, again I wish to emphasize my objection to the
President being erroneously quoted with regard to a depart
ment, and reaffirm the fact that he has not expressed himself
against a department of public health, although some one is
continually suggesting that he is opposed.
It has been also suggested that Congress was opposed to it,
when Congress has expressed no opinion upon the subject, and
.possibly hardly a single Member has committed himself with
finality against the suggestion of a department, and certainly
the matter should be thoroughly discussed previously to an
adverse final commitment by any very careful and just-minded
legislator.
The general secretary of the National Child Labor Commit
tee, Owen R. Lovejoy, esq., in letter of March 18, 1910, expresses
his strong approval of a department of public health.
The secretary of the state board of health of Kansas, S. J.
Crumbine, M. D., says:
I believe I voice the sentiment of the entire membership of the Kan
sas state board of health and the medical profession of this State when
I say that we most heartily indorse the objects of this bill, and trust
that it may be enacted into a law by the present Congress.
The executive secretary of the National Association for the
Study and Prevention of Tuberculosis, Dr. Livingston Farrand,
March 11, 1910, says:
I am in favor of a national department of health.
Thomas Darlington, of New York City, says:
I trust that such a department of public health will be established.
(February 26, 1910.)
CONGRESSIONAL1 RECORD.
John H. Capstick, president of the state board of health, New
Jersey, says:
I wish to say to you that I believe the bill is a good bill and should
become a law.
George EL Simmons, editor of the Journal of the American
Medical Association, says, March 9, 1910:
W ill say that you may depend on us for hearty support.
William Jay Schieffelin, of New York City, says (February
18, 1910) :
It seems to me an extremely Important measure and one which, If
adopted, would result in untold benefit to the people of the country.
Russell Chittenden, of the Sheffield Scientific School, says
(February 16, 1910) :
I think that such a bureau, whether made a separate department or
not, will be of the greatest service for the improvement of the health
of the community.
I trust that the bill in question w ill meet with
general approval and be eventually passed.
J. N. Hurty, state health commissioner of the state board of
health, Indianapolis, Ind., says:
I am heartily In favor of creating a department of public health and
making its secretary a member of the Cabinet.
William F. Slocum, president, Colorado College, Colorado,
says (February 21, 1910) :
,
I am glad to send you word of my strong approval of the bill.
Prince A. Morrow, M. D., o f the American Society o f Sanitary
and Moral Prophylaxis, New York, says (March 10, 1910):
3
conservation of human life without neglecting plant life or
animal life.
Mr. President, no man can read the Report on National Vital
ity—Its Wastes and Conservation, of the Committee of One
Hundred without being impressed with certain great facts:
1. The thoroughness and scientific care with which it made
this report.
2. The stupendous annual loss of life which could be easily
prevented; the immense economic commercial loss and human
misery and sorrow due to preventable illness, inefficiency, de
generation, and death.
3. The wisdom o f the means proposed by the Committee cf
One Hundred for the prevention of this annual loss and for the
conservation of the national life and health.
These proposals are as follow s:
1. Concentration of all federal health agencies into one department.
2. Correlation and coordination of the work relating to human health
and sanitation.
3. Investigation and regulation of health and sanitary matters in
addition to those now provided by existing laws.
4. Cooperative experimental work with state health departments in
some such relation as now exist between the national and state agri
cultural experimental stations.
5. The training and employment of experts in sanitary science, who
can both increase and diffuse knowledge bearing on the preservation
and Improvement of the health of the people.
,
6. The diffusion of this knowledge not only among the several de
partments of the Federal Government and state health officials, but
also among the people in the same manner as farmers’ bulletins are
now being issued.
SU PPO RT OP T H E P LA N PROPOSED.
Mr. President, there is not in the world a more distinguished
body o f scientists and philanthropists than the Committee of
One Hundred, appointed by the American Association for the
i Archbishop Ireland, SL Paul, March 10, 1910, says:
Advancement of Science.
You are on the right track, although perhaps it may take some time
Irving Fisher, professor of political economy of Yale Uni
before you are able to bring Congress to adopt your measure.
versity, is its president. The vice-presidents are: Rev. Lyman
Charles W. Eliot, ex-president Harvard University, March 5, Abbott, editor Outlook, New York City; Miss Jane Addams,
1910, says:
of Hull House, Chicago; Felix Adler, of New York City;
The practical question at this moment seems to be, W hat can be done James Burrill Angell, diplomat, New York City; Hon. Joseph
to promote the efficiency of the various national agencies which already H. Choate, ex-ambassador to England, N ew York City; Charles
have public-health functions?
These agencies are now scattered William Eliot, president of Harvard University, Cambridge,
through several departments of the Government, and in all the depart
Ireland, St. Paul, Minn.;
ments hold subordinate positions. To promoto their efficiency and In Mass.; Right Rev. Archbishop
crease their Influence they need to be united into one bureau or de Hon. Ben B. Lindsay, Denver, Golo.; John Mitchell, New York
partment under a single head.
City; Dr. William II. Welch, professor pathology, Johns Hop
Edward T. Devine, editor of the Survey, formerly of the kins University, Baltimore, Md.; Secretary Edward T. Devine
of the Survey; and the list of 100 contains other names as
Charities and the Commons, March 4, 1910, says:
notable, including Miss Mabel T. Boardman, president of the
I have much sympathy with your view that the subject o f public
health is one eminently worthy of the entire attention and consideration Red Cross; Andrew Carnegie; Thomas A. Edison; Mrs. John
B. Henderson, of Washington; Prof. David Starr Jordan,
of a federal department.
president Stanford University; Dr. Charles A. L. Reed, chair
Hon. R. S. Woodward, of the Carnegie Institution, in letter man of the legislative committee of the American Medical
of March 5, 1910, says:
Association, of Cincinnati, Ohio; Robert S. Woodward, presi
I think you are quite right in standing for such a department rather dent Carnegie Institution, Washington, D. C.; and a host of
than for a bureau o f an existing department.
others no less distinguished for learning, patriotism, and
I inclose as exhibit No. 10 a letter from Dr. Z. T. Sowers, philanthropy.
IN C R E A SIN G L EN G TH OF L IF E .
o f March 7, 1910, to Hon. J a m e s R. M a n n , showing the necessity
and importance for a concentration of these health agencies,
The modern duration of life is widely variant, according to
suggesting, however, the Department of Commerce and Labor.
the organized protection of the health of the people by govern
David S. Jordan, of Leland Stanford Junior University, says, ment.
February 24, 1910:
In India the average length of life is twenty-three years, due,
I decidedly approve of your bill for the establishment of a depart not to climatic conditions, but to ignorance, prejudices, and
ment of public health.
religious superstitions. They will not kill a snake in India,
And Surgeon-General Wyman told me this very morning that and thousands of inhabitants die annually from the poison of
he was not opposed to a department of public health, and in his snake bites. In America we die in like manner from typhoid
and tuberculosis, because we neglect to suppress the causes of
letter to the President of June 21, 1909 (p. 47), he said:
these diseases.
I have never opposed a department of health, with a secretary In the
The length of life in India is not increasing because of their
Cabinet, for I have realized that developments might in time make such
lack of progress; but in Geneva, Switzerland, where the country
a department advisable.
is supposed to be very healthy, the length of life in the sixteenth
ad so, Mr. President, from many societies of public health, century was only 21.2; in the seventeenth century, 25.7; in the
of sanitation, of charities, as well as from private individuals eighteenth century, 33.6; from 1801 to 1883, 39.7; and it is
o f great distinction, come these indorsements of the principle of steadily improving.
this bill.
T H E PROLONGATION OF L IF E .
Is it asking too much that a question of such national magni
Scientific hygiene and increased knowledge of the laws relat
tude and universal approval have consideration?
Mr. President, the Agricultural Bureau was of no great com ing to health have had a very striking effect upon the prolonga
parative value until it became a department, and now its enor tion of human life throughout the world.
mous value is not questioned by any man. It has been worth
A t present in Massachusetts life is lengthening a t the rate of four
thousands of millions of dollars, and its value is annually teen years per century; in Europe about seventeen y e a rs; in Prussia,
the land of medical discovery and its application, twenty-seven yea rs;
increasing.
India, where medical progress Is practically unknown,
It has wisely taught us how to protect plant life, tree life, In short, twenty-three, and remains stationary (page 1 1 ). the life span
Is
animal life, and is a noble, dignified department.
It is demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt by the report of
Is plant life, tree life, animal life confessedly worthy a great
the committee of one hundred that the average human life in
department and human life unworthy of a department?
I recently sent 25,000 bulletins to farmers in Oklahoma on the United States may be, within a generation, prolonged over
how to raise swine. I had no bulletins to send out how to pro fourteen years. I submit the table as to the method of this cal
tect the health of children. I believe in giving first place to the culation.
I
S554&—8S83
If there is any hope of your bill passing, I am heartily in favor of it.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
4
Report on national vitality— Possible prolongation of life.
Cause of death.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10 .
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
84.
35.
89.
87.
38.
39.
40.
Premature birth...............................................
Congenital malformation of heart (cyanosis)
Congenital malformations other than of heart
Congenital debility........................
Hydrocephalus........................
Venereal diseases.............
Diarrhea and enteritis..........
Measles____ _____
Aute bronchitis........... ............
Broneho-pneumonia____________________________________________
W hooping cough_____ ____________________________________ _
___
___
C rou p ........................... ..................... ............................................................... .
Meningitis-------------------- ------------------------------------------------- —
_____ ____
Diseases of larynx other than laryngitis............. - ..........................................
Laryngitis----------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------Diphtheria________________ ______ ______ - ........ —----------------------------------------Scarlet fever............................................................................................................... .
Diseases of lymphatics.............................................................................................
Tonsilitis---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Tetanus........................................................................................................................
Tuberculosis other than lungs.................................................................
Abscess............................................................................................................
Appendicitis_________________________ ___ _______________ ____________
Typhoid fever.............................................................................._ .................
Puerperal convulsions----------------------------- --------------------------------------------- ..
Puerperal septicaemia................................... ................................................ .........
Other causes incident to childbirth_______________________________________
Diseases of tubes..................................................................................... .................
Peritonitis
_ _
Smallpox................................................................. .......... ........................................
Tuberculosis of lungs................................................................................................
Violence............... .......... — ____ ___ ___ — ----------- ----------- -------Malarial fever............................................................................................. .............
Septicaemia.............................................................................................
Epilepsy..............................................................................................
General, ill defined, and unknown causes (including “ heart failure,”
“ dropsy,” and “ convulsions ” ) ........................................................................
Erysipelas____________________________________________________
Pneumonia (lobar and unqualified)— ----- ------------------------------------------Acute nephritis............................... ................... ................- ............... ......................
Pleurisy____________________________________________- ______ ..__
42.
43.
44.
45.
Obstruction of intestines.................... . ............................................... ...................
Alcoholism___________ _______ _______________________________
Hemorrhage of lungs...............................................................................................
Diseases of thyroid body.................... ................. .............. ...... ......................
47. Uterine tumor...................................... ...................................................................
48. Rheumatism............................................................... T
...............................................
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
Anemia, leukemia........................................................ ............................................
Chronic poisonings....................................................................................................
Congestion of lungs..................................... .............................. ................... ......
Ulcer of stomach............. .........................................................................................
Carbuncle.................................................... - ..........................................................
Pericarditis................................................................................................... ........... .
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
Dysentery....................................................................................................................
Gastritis.................................... .......................... .............................. ........ .................
Cholera nostras............................................. ..........................................................
Cirrhosis of liver........................................................................................................
General paralysis of insana....................................................................................
Hydatid tumors of liver...................................................................... ..................
Endocarditis....................................................... ......................................................
Locomotor ataxia........................................................- ..........................................
Diseases of veins.................... .................................. ........................... ........ ........ .
67. Diabetes.............. ............................................................................... ........................
68. Biliary calculi.............................. ......... ................... ................... ...........................
69. Hernia.....................................................................................- ....................................
72. Bright’s disease......... ........................................................................................ .......
76. Calculi of urinary tract...........................................................................................
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
Heart disease............................................................................................................
Influenza............................................................................................. .................. .
Asthma and emphysema................................................................ .........................
Angina pectoris......... ............................................................... ...............................
Apoplexy.................................................................................... ...............................
84. Chronic bronchitis.................. ................ ...............................................................
88. Diseases of bladder_______________________________________________________
• Some inaccuracies in this column.
(2)
(3)
(*)•
A.
(1)
B.
O.
Median age Expecta
tion of
of deaths
life at
from
median
causes
named.
age.
Tears.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
5
8
8
23
24
24
26
28
28
31
31
31
32
33
34
34
34
35
Tears.
50
50
60
50
50
50
50
60
50
50
50
54
54
64
64
54
64
54
52
62
40
39
39
38
* 37
» 37
» 35
* 35
34
34
33
32
32
32
32
35
37
37
39
42
42
43
44
45
46
46
46
47
48
48
48
49
49
49
52
52
62
53
53
64
65
55
66
56
67
58
68
58
59
31
30
so
29
27
27
26
25
25
24
* 25
*25
23
23
23
23
22
22
22
20
* 21
20
19
19
19
18
19
17
17
17
*17
15
16
16
59
69
60
60
61
61
63
63
64
64
65
67
70
71
71
71
73
74
16
16
15
15
14
14
13
13
13
13
12
11
10
9
9
9
9
8
(5)
(7)
(6)
D.
E =B E .
E=C D .
Ratio of preventability
Tears added
(postponabil- Ratio of “ pre
to average
Deaths due
ity), i. e., ratio
lifetime if
ventable ”
to cause
of “ preventa deaths from
deaths were
named as
ble” deaths
cause named
prevented in
percentage
from cause
to all deaths
the ratio of
of ail deaths.
named to all from all causes. preventability
deaths from
of column 5.
cause named.
Per cent.
2
.55
.3
1
Per cent.
70
60
40
S
O
50
40
75
70
40
40
70
60
20
80
75
60
50
85
S
O
85
50
65
55
75
75
35
80
40
o
9.2
.3
7
.08
5.0
.26
.5
1.7
.03
.1
8.1
.7
.23
.4
4.4
.2
.8
1
.2
.83
.2
Tears.
.92
.1
.3
7.74
.8
1.1
2.4
.9
.3
1.6
.07
.06
1.4
.5
.01
.05
.19
.17
.08
.7
2
.2
.4
.36
.1
.5
.01
9.9
7.5
.2
.3
.29
.6
.27
.02
.6
.4
.1
.02
.07
.1
.5
.03
.4
.05
.4
.2
.03
.1
.6
.5
.65
.09
.9
.3
.002
.8
.17
.04
.4
.8
.17
.27
Per cent.
0.8
o
o
• •
30
60
45
S
O
55
o
25
85
80
10
0
60
10
0
50
70
60
50
50
10
0
80
50
60
60
75
75
25
35
40
0
10
40
70
0
40
0
0
0
10
0
25
50
30
25
35
0
so
60
0
10
45
.21
4.64
.32
.33
1.2
.36
.22
1.12
.03
.02
.98
.25
.002
.02
.15
.13
.05
.35
1.7
.06
.34
.18
.06
,2S
.01
7.42 •
2.7
.16
.12
.46
.11
2.32
.16
.17
.6
.18
.12
.6
.02
.01
.53
.14
.001
.01
.08
.02
.14
.05
.02
.13
.03
.02
.1
.003
2.45
.86
.05
.04
.85
.05
.94
.05
.04
2.75
.18
3.15
.18
.15
.15
.34
.08
.002
.04
.09
.02
.0005
.06
,05
.02
.01
.2
.03
.2
.1
.015
.01
.05
.007
.04
.02
.003
.002
.4
.32
.05
.54
.22
.002
.2
.06
.02
.08
.06
.01
.1
.04
.0002
.03
.01
.003
.08
.07
.19
.01
.01
■
03
2.24
.36
.003
,0004
2.02
.35
.07
.1
1.54
.26
.05
.000
.01
.17
.24
.5
.02
.04
.08
.09
.007
.007
* “ Expectation ” for females.
35546— 88S3
I
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
5
Report on national vitality— Possible prolongation of life— Continued.
(4)«
(2)
(8)
JL
B.
Median age
of deaths
from
causes
named.
Expecta
tion of
life at
median
age.
(1)
Cause of death.
69. Gangrene........................ .......................................................................... ..................
Tears.
74
83
All n\| 5 <
? r < Pj
38
(6)
(6)
( 7)
D.
E=C D .
F =B E .
Ratio of pre
Tears added
vent ability
to average
(postponabil- Ratio of “ pre
Deaths due ity), i. e., ratio
ventable ”
lifetime if
to cause
deaths were
of “ preventa deaths from
named as
prevented in
cause named
ble” deaths
percentage
the ratio of
to all deaths
from cause
of all deaths.
named to all from all cause3. preventahility
of column 6.
deaths from
cause named.
O.
Tears.
8
5
Per cent.
0.25
2
Per cent.
G
O
0
100
Per cent.
0.15
Tears.
0.01
6 42.3
14.06
47
67
49
28
8.8
2.8
21.2
9.5
4.4
1.51
6.82
1.33
42.3
42.3
14.06
42.3
R f iS U M f i.
Diseases of Infancv (havin? median age 11
__
Diseases of childhood (having median age 2 to 8)-
-
...........
____ _
_
____
.
18.5
4.2
43
84.3
100
I
° Some Inaccuracies In this column.
6 Although this Is the ratio of general preventahility of deaths under existing conditions, the death rate, 1. e., deaths In relation to popula
tion, will not in the end be affected in this ratio but by only about 25 per cent. The reason for this paradox is that deaths prevented lead to a
larger population.
This detailed estimate of the prolongation of human life four
teen years is based upon a vast amount of data and is a con
clusion justified by the knowledge of some of the most learned
men in the world.
I remind you again of what I pointed out a year ago to the
Senate, that in New Zealand the deaths per thousand per an
num is 9 and a fraction and in the Australasian states 10 and
a fraction, while in the United States it is 16.5, a loss of 7 to
the thousand in the United States in excess of the New Zealand
rate—that is, in 90,000,000 people it would exceed 600,000 deaths
that could be saved annually in our Republic.
YELLO W
FEV ER .
Mr. President, before the American intervention in Cuba
the death rate from yellow fever alone in Habana to the hun
dred thousand population in 1870 was 300; in 1880, 324; in
1896, 639; in 1897, 428; and after the American occupation it
fell: 1900, 124; in 1901, 6; in 1902, zero; in 1903, zero; in
1904, zero.
What a glorious record! What a splendid tribute to the
learning, industry, and self-sacrifice of the devoted medical
men who accomplished this result, most of whom are now
dead. James Carrol and Lazier died from experimental yellow
fever, sacrificing their own lives deliberately in the interest of
their fellow-man. All honor to their names and to the names
of Walter Reed and the others, who, brave, gallant soldiers of
peace, exposed their lives for the benefit of their fellows.
Monuments of stone and “of bronze should be erected to these
patriots of peace, more noble and self-sacrificing in their work
than patriots of war. What does the commerce o f the world owe
to these men who vanquished yellow fever? There could have
been no Panama Canal except for this development of science.
P EO PLE
U N IN F O R M E D
EX P O SE
TH E M SE LV E S.
With the record in Habana of the control of yellow fever there
are thousands of unlearned people who will ignorantly ridicule
the means of the mosquito as an agency for transmitting this
disease; that will deny the transmission of malaria by the mos
quito.
And there are thousands who will Ignorantly deny that bu
bonic plague is transmitted by the flea from the rat and the
squirrel to the human being. The power of the Government
alone acting through its strongest arm is necessary for the pre
vention of a wholesale introduction into the United States of
bubonic plague.
The bubonic plague is now among the ground squirrels.and
rats on the Pacific coast at various scattered points over a
thousand miles apart, due to the thoughtless ignorance, interest,
and prejudice of the commercial interests of San Francisco that
suppressed the faithful and intelligent work attempted to be dis
charged by the officers of the Marine-Hospital Service, which I
may more fully set up hereafter.
The bill which I have introduced is in accordance with the
earnest repeated desires of the American Medical Association,
probably the largest and most honorable association of physi-
85546— 8883
cians and surgeons in the whole world as far as the principle of
the bill is concerned. I have an earnest letter from Dr. Charles
A. L. Reed, chairman of the legislative committee of the Ameri
can Medical Association, which I herewith insert:
Mr. DIXON. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Montana?
Mr. OWEN. I do.
Mr. DIXON. I am very much interested in what the Sena-^
tor from Oklahoma is now saying. Is it not a fact that the
experience of American life insurance companies shows that
the death rate during the past thirty years has not been over
two-thirds of the estimated death rate according to the Ameri
can mortality tables?
Mr. OWEN. It has been very much improved. It has di
minished from 25 deaths to the thousand down to 16.5 to the
thousand. But a year ago I called the attention of the Senate
to the fact that the death rate in New Zealand, where human
life is properly cared for, is nine and a fraction to the thou
sand ; and with all the improvements we have made—and they
have been considerable—it is 16.5 to the thousand with the
American people, 7 to the thousand in excess of New Zealand,
and we have as good a climate as they. Seven to the thousand
for 90,000,000 people means a preventable death loss o f 630,000
people per annum. It is impossible to exaggerate the impor
tance of this appalling national loss.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from New Hampshire?
Mr. OWEN. I do.
Mr. GALLINGER. Can the Senator state to the Senate what
great improvements over the American system have been
adopted in New Zealand, so far as taking care of the life and
health of the people is concerned?
Mr. OWEN. I will-----Mr. GALLINGER. Then one other point. The Senator will
not lose sight of the fact that in a country like ours, which is
made up of very large cities to a considerable extent, with the
attendant poverty that is in those cities, and the impossibility
of caring for the health of infants particularly, the death rate
naturally would be larger than in a country like New Zealand,
that is made up o f smaller communities. The Senator, of
course, will not dispute that as one fact in connection with the
difference between the mortality.
But particularly I should like to know, because I have no
knowledge on the point, what New Zealand has done in the
matter o f health legislation or health protection that is in ad
vance of what we have been trying to do in the United States?
Mr. OWEN. I will answer the question. The policy of New
Zealand which preserves human life rests primarily upon the
broad doctrine of government prevalent and in force in that
country, protecting the weaker elements of society from oppres
sion by commercial ambition. The very poor are protected
from injury at the hands of thoughtless commercialism.
CONGRESSIONAL' RECORD
6
Another thing, under that policy they teach their people what
constitutes a healthy dwelling. They provide a means by which
a man belonging to the weaker elements of society can have
furnished to him at a low rate of interest, on long time, the
means to put up a concrete house. Call it socialism? Yes;
what of it? You ask me to answer the question. I answer it.
They give the housing, which gives good health. In the tables
which I shall presently show, one house on Cherry street, in New
York, has 23 cases of tuberculosis; the house adjacent to it
has 18 cases of tuberculosis; and the next house to it has 13
cases of tuberculosis. Of course, they die. Why should they
not die? And who cares? I care. They are my kin. I care.
I think every man who stops long enough in the mad rush of
American life to understand it will care and will be willing to
try to protect these poor brothers of ours. I shall show these
tables in a few moments, and I shall show how great an im
provement the New York City board o f health has made in these
tuberculosis-breeding houses.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from New Hampshire?
Mr. OWEN. I do.
Mr. GALLINGER. I do not want the Senator to think be
cause I interrupt him that I am combating his very interesting
argument. I have no such purpose. But I was attracted by
the Senator’s statement concerning the great improvement in
health matters that was made in Habana. I have knowledge
of that. That, however, was made under the laws of the United
States and under our present health department or bureau. It
was a marvelous regeneration of that great city. I do not
think that can be used as an argument for turning over our
present Health Bureau to a larger health department, to be cre
ated because that great improvement was made by the health
officers of the United States, and they have exterminated yellow
fever from the southern cities by the same methods.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, the individuals to whom this meri
torious service is due deserve the credit, and not the organism to
which they belong. The regeneration of Habana was not due
to the Marine-Hospital Service, but to Gen. Leonard Wood, a
trained physician of the Medical Department of the United
States Army, under whom Walter Reed, James Carroll, and
Lazear, also of the Medical Department of the United States
Army, carried on this work. Doctor White, of the Marine-Hos
pital Service, followed this work later with excellent results at
New Orleans, but I will presently show the inefficiency of that
organization, not as to its personnel, but because it is a bad
system of government.
Mr. DU PONT. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Delaware?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Delaware.
Mr. DU PONT. Mr. President, I observe that the bill on
which the Senator from Oklahoma is speaking contemplates
the creation of a bureau o f veterinary science. I ask the Sen
ator if it is the purpose of this proposed legislation to take
away the veterinary corps from the Department of Agriculture
and place it under this proposed new department?
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, I will say to the Senator from
Delaware that I have no particular pride in any part o f this
bill or in the bill itself. All that I want to see is the coopera
tion and coordination of agencies affecting human health in one
dignified, efficient department. The bill can be easily amended
to meet any objection made by the Senator; and I see that there
is force in what he says.
Mr. DU PONT. It seems to me that the veterinary service
is properly under the Department of Agriculture.
Mr. OWEN. Now, Mr. President, I submit a letter from
the chairman of the legislative committee of the American
Medical Association. I think he speaks for the American
Medical Association substantially, and there are 80,000 men
who are members, as I understand, or connected with this asso
ciation, which extends from the Atlantic to the Pacific. It is
the greatest medical association in the world. He says:
C i n c i n n a t i , March, 10, 1910.
Hon. R o b e r t L . O w e n ,
United States Senate, Washington, D. C.
D e a r S ir : In compliance with your request for suggestion to be taken
up in connection with the hearing on the bill recently introduced by you
to create a department with a secretary of health, I beg to reply in my
capacity as chairman of the legislative committee of the American Medi
cal Association. In that capacity I have the honor at the same time
to request, first, that you avail yourself of an early opportunity, and
in your own way, to lay before the Senate the facts which I shall pre
sent ; and, second, that you arrange at an early date for a hearing on
your bill, the vital principle of which is so distinctly in consonance with
45546— S883
the interests of the people, as represented by and through the medical
profession.
This is shown by the fact that the American Medical Association,
through its legislative conference, attended by delegates from 36 States
and from the army, navy, and the Public Health and Marine-Hospital
Service, held at Chicago, March 2, 1910, in harmony with the repeated
action of the association for nineteen years, adopted the report of its
Federal and State Regulation of Public Health suggesting
a H ll be passed that will give recognition to the health interests
of the country in the title of ‘ a department ’ and that within that
department there be organized an efficient bureau of health to consist
of all present public national health agencies.”
The physicians of the country, who, as professional students of the
question and as the natural advisers of the people on health questions
and who, consequently, have first knowledge of the subject have long
maintained their present attitude for the following specific reasons:
First. The time has arrived when, under the law of precedent the
health interests of the country ought to pass from their present bureau
stage of development to that of a department. This course of evolu
tion was exemplified, first, I believe, in the development of the Depart
ment of the Interior, then that of Agriculture, and, finally, that of
Commerce and Labor. In each of these instances the antecedent bu
reaus had existed for periods varying from a few years to a decade
or two. The health interests of the country, more fundamental than
all, have been left in the form of, successively, a “ service,” then of a
“ bureau,” for more than a century.
Second. The creation of a department of health Is furthermore de
manded ; first, because sanitary science has demonstrated its ability to
conserve the efficiency and prolong the life of the people; and, second,
because nothing less than the establishment of a department can have
that maximum of moral force and educational influence, that maximum
of prestige and effectiveness combined with business-like economy of
administration that will enable it to deal with the disgraceful, not to
say monstrous, conditions now prevailing in this country.
Third. That a department of health, with the fullness of power and
Influence that can inhere only in a department and nothing less than
a department, is demanded by the conditions to which I have alluded
is conclusively established by the fact that, first, about 600,000 people
die in this country every year from preventable causes ; second, that
something more than 3,000,000 more are made ill and idle for variable
periods every year from the same causes; and, third, that the annual
economic loss from this source alone amounts to more than a billion
and a half dollars every year.
Fourth. That nothing less than a department of health, acting in
cooperation with the States and in full recognition of their rights
and powers, is practicable for the assembling and coordinating of the
existing health agencies of the Government and for their effective,
economic, and business-like administration.
Fifth. That nothing less than the creation of a department of
health can comprise a fulfillment of the pledge to the people contained
in the platform of every political party that appealed to the popular
suffrage in the last national campaign.
In view of the foregoing facts and considerations I have the honor
to request that at the hearing on your bill care be taken to give special
consideration to the suggestions which I shall enumerate.
Many, if not all of them, have been covered in general terms and
some of them in specific terms, in your bill. It has seemed, however,
that by presenting them somewhat in detail in the form of sections
to a possible bill, I could facilitate their consideration in consecutive
order as follows :
Section 1 ought to provide,' as your bill does provide, for the es
tablishment of a department of health under the supervision of the
secretary of health, who shall be appointed by the President by and
with the consent of the Senate, at a salary of $12,000 per annum and
who shall be a member of the Cabinet of the President and who shall
discharge the duties prescribed in the act.
Section 2 might with propriety provide for the constituent bureaus
of the Department of Health as follows :
( a) The Bureau of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine, to which
(a) shall be transferred the Laboratory of Hygiene, now located in the
Bureau of Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service in the Department
of the Treasury, together with all duties, functions, powers, rights, and
prerogatives now vested by law in such Laboratory of H ygiene; and it
shall be the further duty of the Bureau of Hygiene and Preventive Medi
cine (b) to cooperate with the respective States, Territories, and de
pendencies in accumulating statistics and other information as to causes
and prevalence of disease; (c) to conduct continuous investigation into
all sources of danger to human health and life ; (d) to formulate rules
and regulations for carrying out these provisions, and (e) to publish
the records and results of its labors, all under the direction and by the
approval of the Secretary of Health.
(b) The Bureau of Foods and Drugs, to which (a) shall be trans
ferred all duties, functions, powers, rights, and prerogatives now devolv
ing by the Food and Drugs Act of 1907 on the Bureau of Chemistry of
the Department of Agriculture; and the Bureau of Foods and Drugs
shall also (b) supervise the cleanliness and other hygienic and sanitary
features of the buildings and products of manufactories, cold-storage
plants, and other establishments engaged in the commercial preparation
or in the storage of any food product or products whatsoever destined
for interstate commerce; (c) establish standards or purity of fo o d s;
(d) conduct investigations to determine the best method of preparing
foods with reference to the full development of their nutritive va lu e;
(e) determine the food value of articles not now generally recognized as
fo o d s; ( f ) establish standards of purity for d rugs; (g) make a syste
matic and exhaustive study of the medicinal flora of the United States
and its Territories and dependencies ; (h) investigate and, where prac
ticable, promote the naturalization and commercial cultivation within
the United States, its Territories and dependencies, of medicinal flora
indigenous to other countries; (I) publish reports of its investigations,
activities, and conclusions; and (j) formulate and enforce necessary
rules and regulations all under the direction of the Secretary of Health.
(c) The bureau of marine hospitals, to which shall be transferred the
Marine-Hospital Service of the Bureau of Public Health and MarineHospital Service of the Department of the Treasury, together with its
present personnel and all duties, functions, powers, rights, and preroga
tives now vested by law in such Marine-Hospital Service, all to be
administered under the direction of the secretary of health.
( d ) The bureau of quarantine, to which shall be transferred the
Quarantine Service now located in the Bureau of Public Health and
Marine-Hospital Service of the Department of the Treasury, together
with its present personnel and all duties, functions, powers, rights, and
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
prerogatives now vested by law under such Quarantine Service, all to
bs administered under the direction of the secretary of health.
(e) The bureau of institutions and reservations, to which shall
be transferred all hospitals, asylums, “ homes,” and infirmaries located
in any other department of the Government except the Department of
W ar and the Department of the Navy. And there shall likewise be
transferred to this bureau the Hot Springs Reservation and all other
reservations now or hereafter established by the Federal Government
for the conservation of health.
(f ) The bureau of vital statistics, to which shall be transferred
the Bureau of Vital Statistics now located in the Department of Com
merce and Labor, together with its present personnel and all duties,
functions, powers, rights, and prerogatives now vested by law in such
Bureau of Vital Statistics.
(y) The bureau of publication and publicity, which shall (a) publish
the reports of the secretary of health and all reports, bulletins, and
documents of all bureaus of the department of health when approved
for the purpose by the secretary of health, and (b) devise and carry
out the most effective means by which information originating in the
department of health or any of its bureaus may be most widely and
effectively disseminated for the information and guidance of the
people.
Section 3 might with equal propriety provide that (a) there shall
be a medical service of the Department of Health (b) designated by
the initials U . S. II. S., meaning “ United States Health Service,” (c) which
service shall consist of (1) a Regular Medical Corps, which shall con
sist of the United States Marine-Hospital Corps with its present per
sonnel and without other modification in the law governing the same, or
in the regulations enacted in pursuance of such law than may be
necessary to comply with the provisions of this act.
(2 ) A special
Medical Corps, which shall consist of all physicians, surgeons, and
medical officers now employed in any capacity in any department of the
Government, excepting in the army and navy who, subject to the direc
tion of the secretary of health, but without having their status other
wise disturbed, shall continue in their present capacity until the ex
piration of their present tenure, but thereafter all such positions shall
be filled by detail from the regular Medical Corps which shall be selected
in the first instance in accordance with regulations not less exacting
than those whicli now govern entrance into the Marine-Hospital Corps,
(d) The secretary of health shall, consistently with the provisions of
this act, (1 ) define the grades of health service with due regard to the
period of service and efficiency record of its members; (2 ) prescribe
uniforms and insignia for each grade; (3) formulate rules and regula
tions for the government of the corps, and at his discretion (4) detail
any member of the corps for duty in any bureau of the Department of
Health, or (5) for duty in any other department on request of the
secretary of such department, or (0) for duty in any State, Territory,
or dependency, or in the Panama Canal Zone when requested so to do
by the proper authority of such State, Territory, dependency, or the
Panama Canal Zone whenever the resources of the service will permit
such detail.
Section 4 might further define the duty of the secretary of health
by stating that in addition to the duties elsewhere prescribed in the
act (a) lie may, in his discretion, transfer specific duties from one
bureau to the other whenever required in the interests of both economy
and efficiency ; (b) exercise all the functions heretofore exercised, re
spectively, by the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of the In
terior, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Secretary of Commerce and
Labor in connection with any bureau, division, or service transferred
by the act to the Department of Health ; (c) exercise all duties here
tofore exercised by the Secretary of Agriculture in the enforcement of
the pure food and drugs a c t; (d) discharge such other duties as may
be prescribed from time to time by the President and, finally, (e) pre
pare and submit reports relative to his department embracing sug
gestions for the improvement of its service, including recommendations
for change in personnel, duties, and salaries.
Section 5 might provide (a) that the President be authorized and
directed within one year from the passage of the act to appoint an
advisory board of health to consist of six members, two to be ap
pointed for one year, two for two years, and two for three years each,
who shall serve without pay, except their traveling expenses, for not
more than six meetings annually, and whose functions shall be to
confer with and advise the secretary of health relative to all ques
tions of policy pertaining to human health and upon other questions
at the request of the secretary of health ; (b) the present consultative
arrangement between the present Bureau of Health and representatives
of the state boards of health might with propriety be continued be
tween the Department of Health, its Secretary, advisory health boards,
chiefs of bureaus, and the representatives of the state boards of health.
Section 6 and succeeding sections might provide in the usual way
for the transfer of officers, clerks, employees, property, fixtures, etc.
In asking that you take the foregoing points under special consider
ation ; that the hearing be arranged for the earliest practicable date,
and that legislation be reached, if possible, at the present session of
Congress, may I ask that you urge upon your colleagues the importance
to the people of giving due weight to the conditions to which I have
referred ?
I have said that over 600,000 of our people die every year from pre
ventable causes. Suppose that our entire army and navy were swept
off the earth not once but three times in a year. Would the Congress
do anything about it? There are nearly 5,000,000 needlessly ill every
year.
Suppose that every man, woman, and child in all New York,
with Boston and Washington added, were similarly stricken. Would
the Congress inaugurate an inquiry? Our losses from these causes
amount to a billion and a half dollars every year. Suppose that every
dollar appropriated annually for the expense of the Government and
half as much more were actually burned up and the ashes blown into
the sea. Would the Congress take action in the premises?
Our health agencies are scattered, uncorrelated, and unorganized.
Suppose that our monetary system were looked after by a dozen or more
bureaus in almost as many departments, and that it were responsible
for a billion and a half dollars loss every year. Would the Congress
be disposed to think that there was possible relationship between the
lack of organization and the deficit?
In reiterating the request for an early and full hearing on this ques
tion, I beg to emphasize the fact that I do so in behalf of the American
Medical Association and in behalf of the interests of the people of the
United States, as represented by and through the medical profession.
And in this behalf and in view of the fact, deducible from our vital
statistics, that in this country alone the people are dying from pre
ventable causes at the rate of more than one every minute and that
they are falling ill from the same causes at the rate of more than
five every minute, may I not venture to suggest that the subject is
one of sufficient Importance to be entitled to precedence over some
85546— 8883
7
other questions that may possibly be engaging the attention of the
committee?
Aw aiting your early reply, I have the honor to be,
Very sincerely,
C h a k l e s A. L. R e e d ,
Chairman of the Legislative Committee,
American Medical Association.
P• S.— I beg leave to advise you that I am sending a letter to the
same purport, and largely in the same language as this, to Hon. J a m e s
R . M a n n , of the House, who has requested suggestions to be con
sidered in committee in connection with the recommendations relative
to the public-health clause contained iu the President’s message.
Mr. President, this bill (S. 6049) coordinates and brings into
one working body the various health agencies of the Govern
ment.
It proposes no new officers except the secretary and his as
sistant, who should be a permanent officer, acting as a director.general. Such assistant should have this title.
It calls for no new appropriations except the salary of the
secretaries.
It will provide a number of economies by preventing duplica
tion, and make more efficient the money expended and the
officials employed by the present health agencies of the Govern
ment.
The coordination of these agencies has been approved by
President Taft, and the vigorous cooperation of such agencies
with the state authorities in stamping out disease has been
urged by President Roosevelt.
I quote President Taft and what he said in regard to the work
of the Committee of One Hundred in their desire to promote
the national health:
IIow nearly this movement will come in accomplishing the complete
purpose of its promoters, only the national legislator can tell. Cer
tainly the economy of the union of all health agencies in the National
Government in one bureau or department is wise.
President Roosevelt said:
I also hope that there will be legislation Increasing the power of the
National Government to deal with certain matters concerning the health
of our people everywhere. The federal authorities, for instance, should
join with all the state authorities in warring against the dreadful
scourge of tuberculosis. I hope to see the National Government stand
abreast of the foremost state governments.
President Tuft, March 19, 1910, emphasized his opinion of the
importance of protecting the health of the people by the co
operation within constitutional lines between the Federal Gov
ernment and the several States. In regard to the progress made
in the control of tuberculosis by New York, before the Tubercu
losis Congress, at Harmanus-Bleecker Hall, at Albany, N. Y.,
he said;
We should never have built the Panama Canal if we had not had the
Spanish war and had not had army surgeons who had the opportunity
to discover what it was that spread yellow fever and how yellow fever
could be subdued. I think I may say that we should never have built
the canal if we had not also discovered what it was that carried ma
laria, for it was as much the malignant malaria as it was the yellow
fever that prevented the French from putting through that great enter
prise. But we had had experience in Cuba and Porto Rico, and our
medical friends progressing, with a love of knowledge and a love of the
human race, had developed rules that worked, and to-day the Isthmus
of Panama, which was a hothouse of disease, a place that one took his
life in his hands to visit, has become as healthful as any of our South
ern States, and it has been done by carrying out the recommendations
of the medical profession and enforcing the rules of hygiene laid down
by them and put through under law.
I have no doubt that the same thing can be done with respect to
tuberculosis in any community, and I congratulate the people of the
State of New York that they have made such progress in this matter.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
We have an Agricultural Department and we are spending $14,000,000
or $ 1 5 ,0 0 0 , 0 0 0 a year to tell the farmers, by the results of our research,
how they ought to treat the soil and how they ought to treat the cat
tle and the horses, with a view to having good hogs and good cattle and
good horses. Now, there is nothing in the Constitution especially about
hogs or cattle or horses, and If out of the Public Treasury at Washing
ton we can establish a department for that purpose, it doe3 not seem to
be a long step or a stretch of logic to say that we have the power to
spend the money in a bureau of research to tell how we can develop
good men and good women. Some of our enthusiastic conservators of
national resources have calculated how much the life of each man and
each woman in the community is worth to that community. I do not
think it necessary to resort to that financial calculation in order to
justify the saving of human life, such as can be accomplished by the
results of research and advice that will proceed from a bureau of health
properly established at Washington and circulating the results of its
investigation through the country.
It is quite true that Congress has no authority to lay down rules of
action in matters of this sort for the States. It can only do so in the
District of Columbia. And I am sorry to say that if your experts were
to investigate the hygiene of the departments at Washington you would
find them to fall far short of the rules which your society and your
law here lay down for preserving the health and preventing the spread
of tuberculosis. We have much to learn there from you, and I am hope
ful, by the constant assault that the American Medical Association and
other earnest associations of physicians are making upon the National
Government, that within a few years we shall have recognized authority
in Washington whose direction shall be followed out at least in the
District of Columbia.
Almost the closest assistant that I had in the W ar Department- and
who is still with me in the service of the Government— a great, stalwart
man-*—was reported to me suddenly one day as having tuberculosis. I
had authority over him, because he was a soldier, and I ordered him to
8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
Fort Bayard, Is. Mex. He went out there, he was put to bed and
*e
Ped *or s*x months, and in that dry atmosphere, after nine
months treatment, he came back to me and the country a whole, healthtul man. And that has happened in a number o f instances under the
direction and control of Doctor Bushnell, at Fort Bayard, N. M e x .;
and, therefore, I speak with confidence as to the curability of this
disease. We can not all go to Fort Bayard, N. Mex., however much
the New Mexicans might like to have us there to justify their entry to
Statehood ; but they have demonstrated there the possibility of cure,
and I doubt not that under the directions of Doctor Trudeau and the
other authorities the rules have been developed to such a point that if
followed out closely, progressing into each community, we shall reach
the stage in 1915, *or later, that we contemplate, where this dreadful
scourge of mankind shall be conquered, as we have now conquered
malaria and as we have now conquered the yellow fever.
I introduced this bill providing for a department and not for
a bureau. The reason for a department instead of a bureau is
perfectly obvious and perfectly unanswerable.
I reiterate and indorse the five substantial reasons given by
Charles A. L. Reed, chairman o f the legislative committee of
the American Medical Association, and invite special attention
to the cogency of the reasons given.
It is generally agreed that these bureaus should all be brought
together as one working body. To bring established bureaus
under a new “ bureau of public health ” would be to lower the
dignity of the present bureaus by making them the subordinate
bureaus of a new bureau, which would be offensive to every
bureau so subordinated.
To bring these bureaus under a department would not lower
the prestige of a bureau thus coordinated with other bureaus
under the department, and would, I believe, generally meet the
approval of the government officers employed in the various
bureaus so coordinated, giving them a new dignity by being a
distinct branch of a department o f public health, through which
they could enlarge their efficiency and find better expression
and publicity of work done for the public health.
We have had bureaus affecting the public health for one hun
dred years. They are scattered in eight departments. They
have been disconnected and without coordination. They have
even been jealous of each other, the one nullifying and hamper
ing the work of another. They have been without a responsible
head because of this subdivision and because the chief of the
most important of these bureaus, the Surgeon-General of the
Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service, can not express an
opinion or give information until he has consulted the Secretary
of the Treasury—a system that is absolutely ridiculous.
The Secretary of the Treasury was not selected as a Cabinet
officer because of his knowledge of the public health, but because
he was an expert on finance. At present our Cabinet expert on
finance directs government activities in controlling bubonic
plague, and the board of trade and a few commercialized physi
cians of San Francisco would be more important in his eyes in
all human probability than the chief of one of his subordinate
bureaus; at all events this was true as to a previous Secretary.
BUBONIC PLAGU E ON T H E P A C IF IC COAST.
The most dangerous epidemic known to the world has been
the bubonic plague, a germ disease capable almost of explosive
epidemic. “After an incubation of from four to seven days with
headache, vertigo, and mental depression there comes a chill, a
raging fever, great prostration, occasional vomiting of bile and
blood; the glands in the neck, under the arms, at the elbows, in
the groins, under the knees, all over the body, become red and
swollen, tender, and extremely painful. They turn dark, become
tilled with pus. If not opened, burst spontaneously. The dis
ease is sometimes attended with abscesses, boils, and carbuncles.
About this time the agony of life and the sting o f death are
both overcome by a merciful unconsciousness,” and the mass of
human putrid flesh ceases to breathe and the heart is stilled.
This was the “ black death ” of London, killing about 70,000
people with incredible speed—a thousand dying a day. At
Marseilles 87,000 died; 200,000 in Moscow.
It is the most dreaded and dangerous of all international epi
demics. In the Bombay outbreak, of 220,000 cases 164,000 deaths
occurred. It is a disease which infests rats, squirrels, rabbits,
and all animals that carry fleas, and large areas may be in
fected before the human form violently develops. It is the first
disease mentioned in international sanitary agreements.
When the bubonic plague broke, out in San Francisco in
1900—one of our importations from the Orient, known in former
times as the black death or the plague—the city board of health
of San Francisco quarantined the Chinese district. The United
States circuit judge, on June 15, 1900, influenced by the com
mercial spirit of San Francisco, declared the city quarantine
illegal, gratuitously observing in his opinion:
If It were within the province of this court to decide the point, I
sh ou ld hold th a t th ere is n o t n ow and n e v er has heen a ca se o f p lagu e
in th is c ity .
If this high authority (? ) on bubonic plague should also have
decided, “ if within the province of his court, that there never
85546— 8883
a
would be
case in San Francisco,” his judgment in the one
case would be as illuminating as in the other.
Bubonic plague was then (1900) in the city. It is now scat
tered over the Pacific coast at points a thousand miles apart, and
is requiring enormous sums of money to stamp it ou t; and it has
not been stamped out, but is now endemic and spreading through
the infection o f ground squirrels and rats, which continually
infect each other and spread the germs of the disease over en
larging areas and at any time may break out in our thickly
congested centers with tragic results that may stagger the
Nation.
This opinion of the United States circuit judge (1900) was fol
lowed with an immediate federal quarantine of the State of Califoinia, wliicli was tli6 duty of the government officers in charge
under the obligation of the United States to the several States
of the Union and to the nations of the world. The MarineHospital Service officials declared this quarantine.
The governor of California and the commercial bodies of San
Francisco immediately suppressed the Marine-Hospital Service
through the Secretary of the Treasury, compelled the SurgeonGeneral to yield, proved a false case, and made it temporarily
stand as the truth before the country. They furnished evi
dence and proved that there was no bubonic plague in San
Francisco, notwithstanding the fact bubonic plague was there
in sober truth. In any other State the same thing, in all
human probability, would have occurred, for men act alike
under like temptation.
I do not refer to, and I hope it will not be conceived that I
have any desire on earth to criticise, an individual. It is not
the individual, ^either official or unofficial, of whom I speak.
The point I wish to emphasize is that this bureau of public
health was not strong enough to stand up against the power of
a sovereign State demanding that its commerce should not be
interfered with by the publicity of the full truth of the presence
of the plague. Commercialism triumphed over the interests of
the public health because the agencies of the public health were
too weak.
We should not endure such a system any longer, and the
bureau chief who opposes the improvement in this service for
fear of losing some personal prestige exhibits a spirit that
demonstrates he is no longer capable of rendering the country
the highest public service.
The Marine-Hospital Service finally persuaded the Secretary
of the Interior to cause an inquiry in January, 1901, through
experts of the highest class, Prof. Simon Flexner, of the Uni
versity of Pennsylvania; Prof. F. G. Novy, University of Michi
gan ; Prof. L. F. Barker, University of Chicago. This unan
swerable authoritative report was made on February 26, 1901,
finding numerous cases of bubonic plague in the heart of San
Francisco. The United States quarantine law of February 15,
1893 (sec. 4, 27 Stats. 451), required its immediate publica
tion. I am advised that it was suppressed until April 19, 1901,
and until it had been given publicity by the Occidental Medical
Times, the Journal of the American Medical Association, the
Medical News, and the Sacramento Bee.
Again the commercial interests of San Francisco had triumphed
over the bureau and compelled the Surgeon-General, the head
of the bureau, by an order o f his superior officer, the Secretary
of the Treasury, to agree to suppress this report, contrary to the
obvious moral and sanitary duty of the United States. From
that time bubonic plague has widened the area of its terribly
dangerous infection from Los Angeles to Seattle, passing from
rat to rat and squirrel to squirrel and from these animals to
an occasional human being through the agency of the common
flea. Various experts o f the Marine-Hospital Service, who
immediately after the report of 1901 discovered the infection
outside of San Francisco and reported the truth, were by some
strange fatality shortly after their several reports removed
from such duty faithfully performed and sent to the ends of
the world—to Honolulu, to Ecuador, and so forth. The reward
of their faithful service seems to have been a humiliating re
moval at the demand of their commercial opponents. It is
most interesting history, the details of which might with pro
priety be given to the Senate as showing the destructive power
commercial interests can exert over the faithful servants of
subordinate bureau.
I wish to put in the R ecord a statement of Surgeon-General
Wyman, of the Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service,
with regard to this matter, which I had no opportunity of ob
taining until this morning. The following statement he dic
tated to my secretary at a few minutes before the Senate met
this morning by permission of the Assistant Secretary of the
Treasury:
a
a
W ith regard to the publicity in 1900 and 1901 during the prevalence
of plague in San Francisco, Cal., there was no effort on the part of the
bureau nor the department to suppress the facts nor to minimize them.
CONGRESSIONAL’ RECORD.
The Surgeon-General was In constant consultation with the Senators
from Califcrnia with regard to the situation, and also with the depart
ment, and there was no difference of opinion among any of the three
branches with regard to the treatment of the subject. The facts were
freely published in the weekly public-health reports, and while there
was endeavors to suppress by newspapers in San Francisco, that was
not the case with regard to the government publication. There was a
time when the commission of three experts were sent out there and
verified the existence of the plague, and it was known that their full
report was on its way when it was evident a great sensation was ex
pected, and the full report of the committee was not published imme
diately, although the essential facts were published. It was evident
that a wide sensation beyond what was necessary and what was proper
could have been made out of the report of this committee, and it was
so handled that while the central facts were not delayed, still the sen
sational report which would inflict injury upon the State of California
for an indefinite number of years was prevented.
The point I make is that wide publicity ought to have been
given the truth in accordance with our international agree
ments ; wide publicity ought to have been given so as to protect
each State of the Union. I understand that the State of Texas
desired the facts contained in that report and could not get
them. I understand that other States called for that report
and could not get it until it was printed in the public press by
others than our public-health service.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President-----The PRESIDING OFFICER [Mr. G u gg en h eim in the Chair].
Does the Senator from Oklahoma yield to the Senator from
New Hampshire?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. GALLINGER. The Senator does not lay that charge
against the supervising Surgeon-General of the Public Health
and Marine-Hospital Service, does he?
Mr. OWEN. I f the Senator will express what charge he
means, I will answer him.
Mr. GALLINGER. The charge of the suppression of the
fact of the existence of this disease in San Francisco.
Mr. OWEN. I am informed that the report o f the three
experts who were sent out for the purpose of this examination
was not made public until after it had been given to the
public press by the Sacramento Bee and other papers.
Mr. GALLINGER. I f there was suppression, it must have
been by the head of one of the departments.
Mr. OWEN. Oh, I think so.
Mr. GALLINGER. Y es; and not by the Supervising SurgeonGeneral.
Mr. OWEN. I do not think the Surgeon-General can be held
responsible for it, and I do not hold him responsible.
Mr. GALLINGER. I happen to know that the Supervising
Surgeon-General of the Public Health and Marine-Hospital
Service was intensely interested in that matter.
Mr. OWEN. Oh, yes; but, notwithstanding his intense in
terest, this report was suppressed.
Mr. GALLINGER. It might have been suppressed, but not
by the Supervising Surgeon-General.
Mr. OWEN. N o ; it was suppressed by our expert on finance—
the Secretary of the Treasury—whereas it ought to have been
in the charge of an expert on health—the secretary of public
health—who could not be suppressed by a secretary o f finance or
of commerce.
Mr. GALLINGER. That may be; but I am very sure that
the bubonic plague in San Francisco was pretty well taken care
of by the Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service. There is
no doubt about that.
Mr. OWEN. Their employees did the best they could; but
I am advised the people out there, in the meantime, also had
sufficient influence to send the experts who found the bubonic
plague outside of San Francisco to Ecuador, to Honolulu, and
to other distant points. I feel it my duty to say that this
history ought to be exposed in the Senate, and I think a con
gressional inquiry ought to be made into it. It is a national
scandal that the people of the United States broadcast should
be exposed to the bubonic plague in this country and should
have no proper department of health to protect them.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, I am afraid the Senator is
drawing on the imagination of certain people who have imposed
upon him.
Mr. OWEN. I think not.
Mr. GALLINGER. I am afraid he is.
Mr. OWEN. I do not think so.
Mr. GALLINGER. I think that-----Mr. OWEN. I am prepared to give the details in extenso if
the Senator invites it, and I will place upon these records the
whole story.
Mr. GALLINGER. I should certainly invite it, and I do in
vite It.
Mr. OWEN. Then I will immediately prepare this record,
and I will place it before the Senate just as soon as it can be
gotten together—probably in two days.
85645— 8883------2
9
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, I trust that in making up
that record the Senator will consult with the Supervising
Surgeon-General of the Public Health and Marine-Hospital
Service-----Mr. OWEN. With pleasure.
Mr. GALLINGER. And ascertain precisely what was done
by that great bureau.
Mr. OWEN. With the greatest pleasure. I would despise
myself if I should knowingly deal unjustly with any man. I
have no purpose on earth except to serve the health of the
people of the United States and to serve the cause of truth, as
I understand it.
I did not quite finish with the statement of the SurgeonGeneral. I called him up two weeks ago, telling him what I
wanted with regard to a “ department of public health; ” and
I would have been glad to have consulted with him, but he had
to wait until the head o f his department came back before he
could talk with me. How dignified and impressive is this
Bureau of Public Health of the United States. Its chief—the
Surgeon-General—can not discuss the questions affecting the
Public Health Service with a Senator of the United States until
our expert on finance comes home.
Well, Mr. President, immediate publicity of the expert re
port was prevented. California was not “ advertised ” as hav
ing bubonic plague by our health service when this report of
February 26, 1901, was received. As mild a mention as possi
ble was made of cases in an obscure way shortly thereafter,
but only after the papers had given the expert report wide pub
licity. Now, reports are still coming showing cases of recur
rent bubonic plague, and not much attention is given to them,
although they occur from Southern California out to Seattle.
It is a very important matter. It is a very deadly and difficult
disease to suppress and it may easily infect this country from
one end to the other before we know it. We were told by t.h«
newspapers that it was an inconsequential matter, a trifle, that
the disease was merely local, and that it would soon be disposed
of. We are now, after ten years, finding infected rats and
squirrels at points a thousand miles apart on the Pacific slope.
The point I wish to emphasize is that the bureau dealing with
public health was easily suppressed by commercialism and it*
supposed interests (putting in jeopardy the national health,
the national honor, and the National Treasury), and required
to withhold and suppress the truth in violation of section 4 of
the quarantine laws of the Untied States.
They have spent over a million dollars in trying to extirpate it
and they have not been able to do so. It is still going on. T
call the attention of the Senate to the expenditures of money
for this purpose. In 1908 we expended for the suppression of
plague, $228,337.22; in 1909 we expended for the suppression of
plague, $337,403.13; for 1910 we appropriated $750,000 and
$187,771 unexpended balance—in all, $937,771—for the prevention
of epidemics of cholera, typhus and yellow fever, smallpox, and
bubonic plague (called also Chinese plague or black death).
Nearly all of this appropriation was really desired for bubonic
plague, which was the only epidemic seriously threatening the
United States. Fortunately, we have $724,000 of this on hand.
So, from no danger, Mr. President, in 1901, 1902, and 1903, the
danger grew to the request for an appropriation of over $900,000
in 1910. There has been over a million dollars expended and
the plague has not been suppressed. The bureau was prevented
giving publicity to the truth, and Mazatlan, Mexico, was in
fected in consequence of no sufficient precaution.
Here is the most fatal disease of history, which we are told
is “ not dangerous.” Ten years have passed since it was “ not
dangerous,” and we have appropriated practically a million
dollars to suppress this deadly peril “ that is not dangerous,”
and that is not “ advertised ” because it might hurt somebody’s
commercial feelings.
OUR
IN T ERN AT IO N AL
OBLIGATIONS.
A department of public health is absolutely essential in order
to deal with this matter and with similar questions with the full
power and dignity of this Government and in order to faith
fully and honorably comply with the state and international
sanitary obligations of the United States.
The first article of the first title of the International Sanitary
Convention of Paris, 1903, with Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bel
gium, Brazil, France, Spain, Great Britain, Greece, Italy, Lux
emburg, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Persia, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, Servia, Switzerland, Egypt, and the United
States, is as follows:
A r t i c l e 1. Each government shall immediately notify the other gov
ernments of the first appearance in its territory of authentic cases of
plague or cholera.
Particulars are required, constant information provided, and
preventive measures showing the opinion of the experts of every
10
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
nation as to the extreme importance of protecting the world
against bubonic plague.
Yet our Marine-Hospital Bureau was prevented from making
the truth known, and even in its publications made its notice as
obscure as possible for several years. The bureau understood
the importance of publishing the truth; the bureau desired to
tell the truth, but it was suppressed. I refer to this painful his
tory not to criticise the unhappy, miserable, and weak bureau,
but to point out the fatal weakness of a subordinated bureau
as compared with the dignity and power of a department.
mates that fifty active years of a working man’s life represents
a total of $15,000. I f death should occur at the age of 25, the
economic loss to society would be $13,695; at 35, $10,395; at
50, $4,405.
Mr. President, I doubt if any Member of the Senate would
regard this measure of economic value as excessive, yet this
estimate would make our preventable death loss equal an
annual charge of over $6,000,000,000.
The annual loss from tuberculosis is a hundred and fifty
thousand lives to the United States at the average age of 35
years, a terrific social and economic loss.
O BL IG A T IO N S TO AM ERICAN R E P U B L IC S.
Most of this loss could be avoided.
The first general International Sanitary Convention of the
SAVIN G OF L IF E IN NEW YO RK .
American Republics, held at the Willard Hotel, Washington,
December 2-4, 1902, adopted resolutions of the delegates pro
I submit a table of the department of health of the city of
viding a provisional programme and emphasizing the sanitary New York, showing the general death rate from 1886 to 1908,
convention adopted by the Second International Conference of improving from 25.99 to 16.52 per thousand, nearly 10 to the
the American States, held in the City of Mexico October 22, thousand and an improvement o f nearly 40 per cent. (E x
hibit 2.)
1901, to January 22, 1902.
The convention of January 22, 1902, approved by the duly
The tuberculosis death rate has improved from 4.42 to the
authorized delegates of the United States, Mexico, Bolivia, Co thousand to 2.29 to the thousand, a like improvement.
lombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Sal
In Paris the death rate from tuberculosis is twice as great,
vador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Peru, and but, Mr. President, death from tuberculosis in Greater New
Uruguay, pledged the representative governments to cooperate York alone in 1908 was 10,147 persons, and from all causes
with each other toward maintaining efficient and modem sani 72,072. (Exhibit 3.)
tary conditions, and provided:
The vast improvement which has been made in the saving of
That each and all of their respective health organizations shall be life is clearly shown from the tables to which I call the atten
Instructed to notify promptly the diplomatic or consular representatives tion o f the Senate.
of the republics represented in this conference of the existence or prog
I submit, also, Table No. 3, showing a great improvement in
ress within their several respective territories of any of the following
diseases: Cholera, yellow fever, b u b on ic p la gu e, and any other serious the death rate of children under 1 year of age during the sum
pestilential outbreak.
mer months, from 1891 to 1909, in which the death rate has been
That it shall be made th e d u ty o f th e s a n ita ry a u th o rities in each
(Exhibit 4.)
p o r t p rio r to sa ilin g o f th e v e s s e l to n o t e on th e v e s s e l’ s bill o f h ealth decreased one-half.
I submit Exhibit No. 5, the method of the department of
th e tra n sm issib le d isea ses w h ich m a y e x is t in su ch p o r t at th a t tim e.
The Surgeon-General of the United States Public Health and health, in controlling tuberculosis.
I particularly desire to submit to the Senate for their physical
Marine-Hospital Service was president of the convention at
Washington of December 2, 1902. Mexico, not having been inspection certain maps showing the number of cases of tuber
properly advised of the existence of bubonic plague at San Fran culosis in certain down-town sections of New York Ctiy, in the
cisco, as agreed by the international convention of January 22, Cherry and Market streets quarter and Cherry and Pearl
1902, Mazatlan was infected, and because of such failure of the streets neighborhood and the immense improvement obtained
officers of the United States to honorably comply with this con by a few years of effort. (Exhibits 6, 7, and 8.)
On Cherry street you will observe, in the center of the block,
vention, was unable to take sanitary or quarantine precaution.
The apology made for our conduct in this matter by Edward one house with 22 cases of tuberculosis reported between 1894
Liceago, president of the superior board of health of the Re and 1898. The same house the next four years was reduced to
public of Mexico (see report, 1903-4, on Public Health, p. 11), 6 cases.
In the house adjacent to it there were 15 cases between 1894
says:
and 1898 and 2 cases between 1899 and 1903. In the next house
T h e a u th o rities o f San F ra n cisco , Cal., fearing that the quarantine
restrictions would perhaps impose on their commerce a closure of for were 13 cases in the first period and 3 cases in the second pe
eign ports, had ca r e fu lly con cea led th e e x is te n c e o f p la gu e and had g iv en riod, showing the splendid results obtained in New York City
clea n bills o f h ea lth to sh ips lea vin g th a t p o rt.
by the effort of their sanitary authorities in four short years;
This infection of Mazatlan in December, 1902, took place but in this block between Cherry, Cathiden, Hamilton, and
nearly a year after the United States was bound by the sani Market streets were 178 cases of tuberculosis, making the dan
tary convention of January 22, 1902, at Mexico Gity, to give ger of infection to every person entering this block a matter of
Mexico notice.
almost physical certainty.
What apology shall we offer other nations for such a viola
New York has done glorious work in reducing the ravages of
tion of our international obligations to Mexico? What shall this terrible disease.
we say to Peru, Colombia, Chile, and the other American Re
Such a section of a great city may be properly described as
publics for this gross breach of public faith?
a charnal house, where the poor are denied a fair opportunity
Will they be content when we say this matter was in the care of life by the grinding processes of unthinking commercial en
of a subordinate little bureau, which was thoughtlessly overruled ergy and power, and are dying by thousands when they might
by a secretary of finance not in sympathy with such a subject- be saved to the great economic gain of the United States, to
matter? What shall we say to the state boards of health of the great financial and commercial advantage of this Nation.
Texas, Indiana, Colorado, and other state boards that demanded I do not make an appeal on the basis of humanity and patriot
the report of the experts of the Marine-Hospital Bureau, and ism alone, but I put it upon the cold basis that ought to appeal
were denied the full truth as to the bubonic plague in Cali to the commercial instinct of the Nation, even if some men
fornia?
in the insane race for commercial and financial power and
Mr. President, a miserable bureau will not d o! It has been prestige seem to have forgotten the value of human life and of
tried in the balance and found wanting.
human happiness.
The importance of the subject-matter, the dignity and honor
PRESEN T COST OF H E A L T H AG EN CIES OF U N ITED STATES.
of the United States, its international agreements, and the
The United States made appropriations for the present fiscal
health and welfare of the world demand a department and a year for sanitary and health purposes in the following amounts,
secretary of public health.
as nearly as I can ascertain;
T U BE RCU LO SIS.
Mr. President, Frederick L. Hoffman, statistician of the Pru
dential Life Insurance Company (Statistical Laws of Tubercu
losis, American Medical Journal, 1904), estimates the commer
cial loss per annum to the United States from tuberculosis alone
at $240,000,000.
Collier’ s editorial ( “ Expressed in money,” July 25,1908) esti
mates the loss from tuberculosis alone at $330,000,000 per an
num, and says:
Is it any wonder, then, that the best physicians are heart and soul
engaged in the study of its prevention?
Mr. Hoffman ( “ Physical and medical aspects of labor and
industry,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and
Social Science, May, 1906) endeavors to establish the approxi
mate measure of the social and economic value of life, and esti* 5546—
8883
Department of Commerce and Labor.
N a v y ___________________________________
W a r --------------------------------------------------------Treasury ------------------------------------------------In terior--------------------------------------------------Agriculture-------------------------------------------Bureau of Public Printer.
District of Columbia-------T o t a l _________________________________________________
$533, 000. 00
1, 827, 428. 00
6, 400, 734. 00
2, 512, 733. 00
1, 748, 350. 00
1, 275, 820. 00
3, 405. 79
7, 270. 00
663, 680. 00
14, 972, 320. 79
A total of nearly fifteen millions. This does not include the
service in the Philippine Islands, Porto Rico, nor Cuba, nor 114
physicians, nor 28 nurses among the Indians, nor the one hun
dred and odd clerks in the medical division of the Pension
Office, nor the medical attention to sick prisoners, nor for the
collection of medical statistics by the Census Bureau.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
There appear to be over 12,000 persons employed in this serv
ice, not including those engaged in Porto Rico, Cuba, Panama,
the Philippines, nor in the Agricultural Department.
These agencies ought to be considered in one department It
meets the best opinion in the United States.
The people of the United States are ready to support a de
partment of public health and will indorse this general policy
of concentrating all of the health agencies of government.
“A department of public health ” has been indorsed by the Na
tional Grange (Des Moines, 1909) ; by the American Federa
tion o f Labor, with about 2,000,000 members; by the American
Medical Association, with about 80,000 physicians and surgeons
affiliated; by the National Child-Labor Committee; by the Con
ferences of Governors; and in one form or another by every
political platform.
The Republican platform for 1908 says:
W e commend the efforts made to secure greater efficiency in na
tional public-health agencies and favor such legislation as will effect
its purpose.
The Ohio Republican platform of this year declared in
favor of—
The organization of all existing national public-health agencies into
tt single national public-health department.
In Connecticut and other States similar declarations have
been made.
The Democratic platform in 1908 in like manner states:
We advocate the organization of all existing national public-health
agencies into a national bureau of public health, with such power over
sanitary conditions connected with factories, mines, tenements, child
labor, and such other conditions, connected within jurisdiction of Fed
eral Government— and which do not interfere with the power of the
States controlling public-health agencies.
The Committee of One Hundred of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science and the American Medical
Association, with 80,000 members, advocate a plank in a na
tional platform in sentiment as follow s:
Believing a vigorous, healthy population to be our greatest national
asset, and that the growth, power, and prosperity of the country de
pends primarily upon the physical welfare of its people and upon their
protection from preventable pestilences of both foreign and domestic
origin and from all other preventable causes of disease and death, in
cluding the sanitary supervision of factories, mines, tenements, child
labor, and other places and conditions of public employment or occu
pation involving health and life, we advocate the organization of all
existing national public-health agencies into a national department of
public health, with such powers and duties as will give the Federal
Government control over public-health interests not conserved by and
belonging to the States, respectively.
T H E CO NSERVATIO N OB' L IF E , H E A L T H , AND E F F IC IE N C Y .
Mr. President, I believe in the conservation of our natural
resources—of our coal fields, oil and gas fields, water powers,
forests, and mines; the development of our natural resources in
establishing good roads and improving our waterways.
The conservation of these great natural resources of our na
tional wealth are of great importance, but the conservation of
the life and efficiency of our people is of far greater importance,
and should not be destroyed or impaired by unthinking com
mercialism. The conservation of the vitality and efficiency of
our people is a problem of the first magnitude, demanding im
mediate intelligent attention^
Why conserve coal fields and not coal miners?
Why conserve plant life and not human life?
Why conserve animal life and not child life?
We conserve our water powers and forests and forget our
people.
We have a great department conserving animal life and plant
life and no department conserving human life.
This can not continue.
I earnestly invite the Senate to consider Senate bill No. 6049
and the Report on National Vitality, by the Committee o f One
Hundred on National Health, which has been published as a
Senate document and which gives in a compact form the essen
tial principles relative to this matter, an abstract and sum
mary of which I insert as Exhibit 1.
Under a department of public health these problems can be
worked out with far greater efficiency. The cooperation of the
authorities of the several States of the Union and of the munici
palities of the several States, each one operated along the lines
of constitutional propriety, can be established by a department
of public health with much greater efficiency than through a
subordinate bureau.
Indeed, under a subordinate bureau such cooperation is im
practicable. The bureau has not sufficient dignity or power in an
emergency. It has no national standing. It can not take the
Initiative, but must always stand subject to the orders of a
Secretary too greatly influenced by mere apparent commercial
and fiscal interest. A bureau of public health so controlled is
pitiful, if not despicable, as an agency of an enlightened Nation.
35548— 8883
11
Mr. President, I present this bill (S. 6049) to the Senate with
no pride of authorship, because I deserve no credit in that re
spect, and am perfectly willing to assist a bill drawn by any
other Senator which shall better accomplish the purposes which
I have at heart.
I realize that my colleagues are Intensely preoccupied with
the multitude of demands upon their time and attention.
But this is a question o f vast national importance. In eight
years we have increased our expenditures over the average of
preceding years by the huge sum of $1,072,000,000 for the army
and navy (see speech of Mr. T awney , chairman of the Com
mittee on Appropriations (R ecord, Mar. 4, 1909, 8835), and are
spending 70 per cent of the national income to cover the obliga
tions of past wars and the preparation for possible future war,
or about seven hundred millions per annum for such purposes.
But for war on preventable diseases, now costing us infinite
treasure in life, efficiency, and commercial power and prestige,
we spend practically nothing and do not even employ the
agencies we have in an efficient manner.
In the name of the people of the United States, and of the
great State of Oklahoma especially, and in the name o f the
American Medical Association, whose 80,000 associates and mem
bers are the faithful and self-sacrificing guardians of the health
of our people, and in the name o f the Committee of One Hundred
of the American Federation of Labor, of the National Grange, and
of the various health boards of the 46 States of the Union and of
the great body of learned men who unanimously desire im
proved sanitation and the application of the improved agencies
of preventing disease, disability, and death, I pray the Senate
to establish a department of public health, with a Cabinet officer
at the head of it.
The principle of the bill meets the general approval of th«
public-health societies and o f the medical associations of the
United States, and there should be no difficulty in perfecting
this bill and in impressing upon the country the importance
of organized effort to control the ravages of tuberculosis,
typhoid and malarial fevers, bubonic plague, and other pre
ventable diseases, which inflict such enormous injury upon the
people of the United States, impose such vast, but needless,
human misery and pain, with so great financial loss and loss of
prestige and power.
A commercial nation will not be unmindful of the commercial
value of the saving of life and efficiency possible, which ia
easily worth $3,000,000,000 per annum.
A humane nation will not fail to act when it is known that
we could save the lives o f 600,000 of our people annually,
prevent the sickness of 3,000,000 of people per annum, who
now suffer from preventable disease, and greatly abate the
enormous volume of human pain, misery, and death.
I believe in the conservation of our natural resources, and
I believe in the conservation of the life and health of our
people, the protection of the children of this country from
preventable diseases, from infected milk, from infected ice, and
from other things which unnecessarily destroy their tender
lives. I have submitted here, as evidence of what can be done,
the substantial results shown to have been accomplished in
New York City in the protection of child life. I have offered
the tables as exhibits, asking those Senators who take an in
terest in the subject to look at them and see what they really
mean.
Thousands of people are ignorantly and needlessly exposed
to the poison of the mosquito and fly, to bad water, bad air,
bad food. We ought to have every school-teacher in the United
States with bulletins in his hands, teaching the lessons of sim
ple public health, the lessons that will protect the children
from the infected mosquito, that will protect the country
family from the infected fly that causes typhoid fever. We
ought to save the lives of those people, and we can not do it
with a health bureau that has to ask the Secretary of the
Treasury before the head of that bureau may make a comment
on a public-health question.
It is unspeakably bad to have such a system of government.
I think we ought to amend it; that we ought to amend it with
out delay, and that no pride of opinion ought to stand in the
way.
I feel that I am a bad advocate because I can not speak as
temperately as I ought to speak. I feel that I alienate the sym
pathy of men whose sympathy I desire, and that my zeal may
lead them to question the accuracy and sobriety of my judg
ment. If Senators can only take the time to examine the facts,
they will perceive I have not really stated the case as stiongly
or as well as it might easily have been done by others.
I trust, Mr. President, that the Senate may not fail to take
action in regard to this matter at the present session.
12
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, I do not agree with the
Senator from Oklahoma that he is a bad advocate. I think he
ia a most excellent advocate. The Senator complains because
the Supervising Surgeon-General of the Public Health and Ma
rine-Hospital Service has to consult a Cabinet minister. That
is due to an executive proclamation, I take it. But, is the Senator
curing it? The Senator is going to make a department o f the
Government, called the department of commerce, labor, and
health, and the “ health ” is to be a bureau under that depart
ment.
Mr. OWEN. Not at all.
Mr. GALLINGER. That is the way the Senator’s bill reads.
Mr. OWEN. No, sir.
Mr. GALLINGER. Then I have read it Incorrectly, and I
will examine it again and In my own time call attention to it.
Mr. OWEN. I should be deeply obliged to the Senator if he
would read the bill.
Mr. GALLINGER. I will. I have read it only casually.
Mr. OWEN. It provides for a department of public health,
without regard to any other department, and makes it independ
ent of any other department, because it is the most important
agency in which the United States can be engaged.
Mr. GALLINGER. I think I am right.
Mr. OWEN. I f we were going to abolish any o f the secre
taries, I would abolish the Secretary o f War and the Secretary
of the Navy and leave the military and naval administration
of the Government with the trained men of the War College and
with the military experts o f life-long training and use these ex
perts in time of war as the heads of these military bureaus by
promotion on m erit The present Secretaries are advisers in
the Cabinet merely of matters o f civil administration in times
of profound peace and hold their portfolios chiefly as an excuse
for their existence in a Cabinet administering the affairs of a
peaceful Nation and in no urgent need o f their advice as experts
in war.
Mr. FLETCHER. I f the Senator will allow me to interrupt
him for just a moment, this is a very important matter, and I
certainly feel indebted to the Senator for the care with which
he has examined it. The question in my mind is whether the
present Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service could not
be utilized to do the work and accomplish the purpose the Sena
tor aims at by this bill. That service is quite well equipped;
it has a number of efficient and capable officers, the necessary
material and machinery, and it would seem that possibly— I
inquire of the Senator whether or not he has considered that—
divisions might be created and the authority be vested in those
divisions, and in the present Marine-Hospital Service, to carry
out precisely what the Senator intends to carry out by creating
this special department.
Mr. OWEN. The effect of this bill is to take the MarineHospital Service and erect it into a department of public health,
and bring into it all the other agencies affecting sanitation and
public health in the departments where they are now scattered,
so that there shall be one authoritative head on the question of
public health.
I do not wish to belittle in any way the Marine-Hospital Serv
ice. It is a very useful bureau, and has been particularly so in
the matter of yellow fever at New Orleans.
Mr. FLETCHER. In this connection I ask leave to have
printed in the R ecord , following this discussion, a short article
appearing in Florida Health Notes. I think it would be of
some consequence if the Senate had the use of it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so or
dered.
The article referred to is as follows:
N A TIO N A L H E A L T H A D M IN IS T R A T IO N .
Possibly there may be “ something doing “ in Congress this winter
in regard to an assembling under one head of the various bureaus now
in control of government health matters, to be designated as “ The
Bureau of Public Health.” President T aft, in his annual message to
Congress, is quoted by the press of the country as recommending such
a procedure by say in g:
“ There seems to be no good reason why all the bureaus and offices
in the General Government which have to do with the public health or
subjects akin thereto should not be united in a bureau to be called
‘ The Bureau of Public Health.’ ”
If Surgeon-General Wyman will consent and Congress will so legis
late, there really does not seem to be any valid reason, come to think
of it, or objection to adopting President T a ft’s suggestion by utilizing
the present Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service for this pur
pose.
The Notes thinks that this service, with an already too long a title,
has been in fact the Public Health Bureau of the country for several
years, and could, without any violent upheaval of routine, be made
the National Bureau of Public Health, and could be so reorganized as
to embrace in its administration all factors connected with the publichealth management of the country.
The Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service in the scope of work
which for the past ten or fifteen years it has been doing has outgrown,
so to speak, to a large degree, its original purpose, namely, that of
taring for the sick and disabled seamen of the merchant-marine service
3 5 5 4 0 -8 8 8 3
t?1® couBt ^T’ so that
Present hyphenated title Is incongruous In
that two distinct purposes, purely medical and a sanitary administra
tive, are coupled with each other when each are distinct in aim and
Intention.
W ithout confusion or any very radical change it seems to the Notes
that a bureau of public health could be so constituted that the medical
feature of marine-hospital management could be made one of the
divisions of the organization rather than the principal feature of the
organization itself, and that, too, without in the least detracting from
or impairing the efficiency of the medical aid and assistance as now
given the merchant-marine service of the country.
The Notes thinks that a bureau of public health could very wisely,
as to efficiency and in extent of public-health service to be given to
the country, be organized as one head having several divisions of dis
tinctive health administration, each with its sanitary chief, who, by
the way, need not be a commissioned officer of the present Public Health
and Marine-Hospital Service, but who has been selected for his knowl
edge and experience in a particular or especial line of health work.
And right here the Notes desires to express another thought: That the
public-health service of the country should be a civil function of gov
ernment administration just as is the customs service or the judicial,
and not one of a military management.
...
., ,
For instance a division ot domestic and maritime sanitation should
embrace all questions of investigation and management of quarantines,
___
.
... ,,
whether on land or by w ater;
A division of general hygiene and sanitation could deal with the
pure-food laws and with inquiries into the causes of disease of man
or animal, epidemics, endemic or sporadic outbreaks, together with the
pollution of streams, and framing regulations preventing the sam e ;
A division of scientific research and experimentation would control
all laboratory investigation of disease in every form which might pre
sent itself, whether in man or an im al; assisting state boards of health
in the health work of the States academically and financially, and
affording instruction to state and municipal health officers in the na
tional laboratory at Washington ; and
A division of medical maritime service which would include the
medical assistance to the merchant marine as is now conducted.
Other divisions of public health work could be provided for, and the
scheme can be enlarged as experience and time show the necessity for
additions, but the distinctive feature of the plan should be preserved
by having separate divisions for each special line of work.
Accordingly, instead of creating an entirely new bureau with new
officials and perhaps men untried by experience, the decidedly better
plan as the Notes thinks, is to build upon what the country now has,
and which has been looked upon as the public health department of the
United States, by utilizing its present personnel and its knowledge of
the ability and experience of material to be gathered together from all
over the country, for in the work which it has been prosecuting along
sanitary lines for fifteen or more years the present Public Health
and Marine-Hospital Service has gained by experience alone a vast
amount of knowledge both of conditions, measures, and men which it
would take a bureau newly starting out an equal number of years to
obtain.
.
. „
_ ,
The Notes hopes that the present Congress may be influenced by
President T a ft’s wise suggestion, but desires also that in the formation
of this new bureau of public health that the present Public Health
Service may be merely rearranged or reorganized on the above-outlined
plan.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, I wish to correct an ob
servation I made a moment ago, and I want the Senator from
Oklahoma to hear it. I was mistaken as to the text of the bill.
I had read in another document the suggestion that this was
to be a compound department, and that health was to be but
one element of it. I think the Senator’s bill clearly establishes
a department of public health.
Mr. OWEN. Without question.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, I have just two or three
additional observations to make about this matter.
The Senator from Oklahoma has made a very illuminating
argument, and I have been pleased to listen to him. It is possi
ble that the Senator’s contention is right and that this ought to
be done, and yet I think it is something we can well pause
and consider very deliberately. We have a bureau called the
Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service, which is officered
by some of the most accomplished medical men of the world, a
bureau that has done very remarkable service. It has taken
cognizance of yellow fever, of the bubonic plague, and of all
the troublesome diseases that have alarmed mankind at differ
ent stages of the world’s history, and it has been managed with
rare skill and success.
In addition to that, we have, I believe, in every State of the
American Union a state board of health, and if they are all
as efficient as is the state board of health in the little State
which I in part represent here, they are doing very remarkable
work and are not neglecting any of the things that the Senator
from Oklahoma has so eloquently pleaded for.
Mr. President, I have been interested in the Senator’s state
ment that in some way—he has not told us just how, or how
long a time it is going to take—he is going to make the aver
age of human life fourteen years longer than it is now. That
is interesting to me and interesting to some of my associates
here, who would like to have it accomplished right off, if it can
be done. I think the average duration of human life is about
thirty years. The Senator from Oklahoma will correct me if
I am wrong.
Mr. OWEN. It varies very much, from twenty-one years in
India to fifty-two years in Sweden. It varies very much, accord
ing to the care taken in preserving the health, particularly
that of children.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
Mr. GALLINGER. Undoubtedly the average of human life
has been increased of late years, but when I was trying to gain
some information of a medical nature I remember that thirty
years was stated as the average of human life. So, instead of
living thirty years the average human being in the United States
is going to live forty-four years. It is a dream, pure and
simple.
Mr. OWEN. The Senator ought not to say it is a dream
without having inspected the data upon which it is founded. I
have given (supra) a table of evei’y class of disease by which
human beings are afflicted, with the percentages made up by
the best experts in the world, as to what can be accomplished as
to each particular one in prolonging life, and show the addition
of these gains altogether makes fourteen years of increased life.
Mr. GALLINGER. And the head of that body of experts is
a professor in a university in the United States, who never
studied medicine a minute in his life.
Mr. OWEN. I f you refer to Professor Fisher, of Yale, he is
a man of wonderful learning, but the tables were prepared by
men among the ablest men in the medical profession.
Mr. GALLINGER. Yes.
Mr. OWEN. The data in this has been brought about by those
who are learned in the science of health, and he has collated the
information and the data of the American world on the ques
tion of vitality. He is the professor of political economy in
Yale University, and his learning I do not think can be min
imized.
Mr. GALLINGER. Oh, n o ; not on political economy-----Mr. OWEN. It deals with this question as a matter of vital
statistics.
Mr. GALLINGER. And a good deal of which is probably
false political economy. But very likely his political economy
is right and mine wrong.
Mr. OWEN. I can not refuse my assent to that suggestion.
Mr. GALLINGER. I thank the Senator. Human life has
been extended considerably by existing medical forces in this
country. It no doubt can be still further extended; but that
we are going to add 50 per cent to the average of human life
in this country anywhere within a reasonable time is, to my
mind, more than doubtful, to say the least.
Mr. OWEN. If the Senator will study the Aristocracy of
Health, and if he will consult Horace Fletcher, he will live to
be 150 years old; and no one will rejoice at that more than I.
Mr. GALLINGER. My observation has been that almost
every man in this country who has been a crank on the matter
of correct living has died young. Dio Lewis died young;
Graham died young; and I am not sure but that Horace
Fletcher, who is chewing his food 36 or 38 times before he
swallows it, will die young.
Mr. OWEN. And how does the Senator from New Hamp
shire feel to-day?
Mr. GALLINGER. I feel very well.
I meant to say in speaking of the Marine-Hospital Service
and the state boards of health that by legislation we have co
ordinated those medical forces, to use a term with which we are
familiar in this body, and the state boards of health are now
regularly, at stated times, in consultation with the Public
Health and Marine-Hospital Service, looking to the interest of
the public health throughout the length and breadth of our land.
In addition to those forces we have that great fund which
Mr. Carnegie has so generously placed at the disposal of the
scientific people of this country, and his foundation is employ
ing some of the leading experts in the world in investigating
subjects of public health and the proper remedy for certain
diseases. So the matter is not being neglected.
Mr. President, this subject is an interesting one, but it is a
propaganda that may well be looked into very carefully. The
Senator from Oklahoma speaks of the Committee of One Hun
dred. I have been invited several times to join the celebrated
Committee of One Hundred, but I did not do it, and hence I am
not a member of it. So I can not speak by the book, but am
merely stating some general facts. The Committee of One Hun
dred is going to do great things for the health of the people of
the United States. That committee has spent up to the present
time $44,236 in exploiting this particular subject, and it is now
appealing for funds to reimburse it. Professor Fisher, a very
distinguished gentleman and scholar, without any special knowl
edge of medical subjects, is promoting this propaganda. Pro
fessor Fisher, under date of the 23d day of December, 1909,
sent out a letter in which he says:
Our legislative subcommittee and executive subcommittee have held
frequent meetings. W e believe that it is not possible to overcome the
opposition unless a campaign fund of from twenty to twenty-five thou
sand dollars can be raised at once. This will be used for printing, sta
tionery, telegrams, etc., the effect of which will be that Congressmen,
35540— 8883
13
especially pivotal Congressmen, will not dare to displease their con
stituents by opposing President T a ft’s programme. It will also be used
to reach our American Health League— which contains many thousand
health enthusiasts— to start up our “ authors’ league ” of 1,000 health
writers, to stimulate our press council of 100 leading editors, and to
supply them and the members generally with ammunition in the way of
literature; also to reach the labor organizations and the grange and all
our allies.
In the same letter Professor Fisher says this:
I am writing to you among the first, knowing that you keenly appre
ciate the importance of overcoming the selfish opposition to a project
which, once started, will surely expand within a decade so that millions
upon millions of government money will be put into this most needed
form of national defense.
Letters received from Congressmen in re
sponse to our effort to poll them on this question show that many of
them, and especially those who control procedure, need something more
than the President’s message to urge them to action ; in short, that they
must have letters and telegrams from their constituents.
I am not going to find any special fault with Professor
Fisher for carrying on this propaganda, but I do not want it to
go out to the country that this is a spontaneous movement. It
is calling for the expenditure now of large sums of money, and
the return, according to Professor Fisher’s letter, is to be that
the Government will pour millions upon millions of dollars into
the laps of those people who are to take possession of health
matters in our country in place of the instrumentalities we now
have at our command. It may be all wise, it may be all well,
the Senator from Oklahoma may speak by the book, but I sug
gest that in view of the facts patent to many members o f the
medical profession who have not yet been converted to the view
the Senator so ably presents, we can afford to pause and very
carefully investigate all the facts bearing on the question.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President-----The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from New Hamp
shire yield to the Senator from Oklahoma?
Mr. GALLINGER. I was going to present a conference re
port. Of course, I yield to the Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. OWEN. It is merely to make a brief answer.
Mr. WARREN. Will the Senator from Oklahoma yield to
me for a moment?
Mr. OWEN. I shall not take over two minutes, and then I
will be off the floor.
I simply wish to say in introducing Senate bill 6049 that I
had no connection whatever with the Committee of One Hun
dred. I did not know anything about their plans or methods
when I introduced this bill. In fact, they were pursuing a dif
ferent policy, if I understand it. I can not in two minutes dis
pose of the suggestions made by the Senator from New Hamp
shire, but I will do so at a later time, and will answer abun
dantly the suggestions which he now makes.
I will merely say at this time that my action In introducing
this bill was on my own motion, without consultation with any
body, except that I had considered this matter for many years,
as I have already explained. I call attention to the fact that
every political party has expressed itself In this behalf; and I
pointed out exactly what their words are; and the American
Medical Association, I understand, for twenty years has been
trying to accomplish some results in this matter.
There is no reason on earth why private citizens interested In
this matter should not take an active interest in it, and the
Committee of One Hundred should not be treated with con
tumely, and should not be made to appear as carrying on an
offensive or improper propaganda. The American Medical Asso
ciation nineteen years ago (1891) by a committee—Dr. Jerome
Cochran, chairman—urged this policy of a department of public
health. I f it be a sin to carry on a propaganda to pass more
efficient laws for the protection of human life in this country,
let me be counted a chief among sinners. I should regard it
as discreditable to Congress that any propaganda should be
necessary. Congress should rejoice at this great opportunity
of service pointed out by the Committee of One Hundred. I
shall put into the R ecord the name of each one of the Committee
of One Hundred, with his standing, to see who these “ cranky ”
patriots may be, who sin against the laws of patriotism by ad
vocating the improved methods of protecting the public health,
and herewith submit the name, occupation, and organization of
the members of the Committee of One Hundred:
CO M M IT T EE OF ONE HUNDRED OF T H E AM ERICAN A S S O C IA T IO N
ADVANCEM ENT OF SCIEN CE ON NA TIO N A L H E A L T H .
FOR T H E
Rev. Lyman Abbott, New York C ity ; Miss Jane Addams, Chicago,
111.; Felix Adler, New York C ity ; James B. Angell, Ann A rb or; Hon.
Joseph II. Choate, New York C ity ; Charles W . Eliot, Cambridge;
Archbishop Ireland, St. P a u l; Hon. Ben. B. Lindsay, D enver; John
Mitchell, Indianapolis; and Dr. W illiam H . Welch, Baltimore, vicepresidents.
Irving Fisher, president; Edward T. Devine, secretary; Title Guar
antee and Trust Company, treasurer, 176 Broadway, New York City,
executive officers.
14
CONGRESSIONAL’ RECORD.
C O M M IT T E E OF ONE HUNDRED.
Dr. A. C. Abbott, M. D., assistant health officer of the city of Phil
adelphia, P a .; president board of h ealth ; professor of hygiene, Philadel
phia, Pa.
Rev. Lyman Abbott, editor Outlook, New York City.
Samuel Hopkins Adams, author. New York City.
Miss Jane Addams, philanthropist, Hull House, Chicago, 111.
Felix Adler, professor of Hebrew, Columbia University ; established
New York Society for Study of Ethical Culture, New York City, N. Y.
W illiam H. Allen, Ph. D., director bureau of municipal research;
social worker ; author of Health and Efficiency, New York City.
'President James B. Angell, president emeritus University of Michi
gan : diplom atist; Regent Sm ithsonian; ex-United States minister to
C h in a ; Ann Arbor, Mich.
Ur. Hermann Biggs, chief medical officer, health department, New
York City ; professor University and Bellevue Hospital Medical College,
New York City.
Dr. Frank Billings, leading physician of Chicago, 111., professor Rush
Medical College, ex-president American Medical Association. Chicago,
111.
John Shaw Billings, librarian public libraries. New York Citv, profes
sor of hygiene, University of Pennsylvania, census expert vitality statis
tics, New York City.
Miss Mabel T. Boardman, president American Red Cross, W ashing
ton. D. C.
Bishop C. H. Brent, bishop Philippine Islands, Manila, P. I.
Dr. Joseph D. Bryant, ex-health commissioner New York City, ex
president American Medical Association, private physician to Grover
Cleveland, New York City.
Luther Burbank, expert on plant life, Santa Rosa, Cal.
Andrew Carnegie, ironmaster and philanthropist, New York City.
Prof. James McKean Cattel, editor Science and Popular Science, pro
fessor of psychology, Columbia University, New York City.
Prof. R. H. Chittenden, Ph. D., LL. D ., director, Sheffield Scientific
School, Yale University, referee board, department of agriculture, New
Haven, Conn.
.
,
, ^
,
.
Hon. Joseph H. Choate, lawyer, diplomat, ex-ambassador to England,
New York City, N. Y
r.
Dr. Thomas D. Coleman, A . M., M. D., distinguished physician,
Augusta, Ga.
Prof. John R. Commons, professor of political economy, University of
Wisconsin, authority on labor legislation, Madison, W is.
Dr. Thomas Darlington, ex-commissioner and president board of
health, ex-president of the American Climatological Society, New York
City.
Edward T. Devine, editor of the Survey, professor of Columbia Uni
versity, New York City.
Mrs. Melvil Dewey, president Association of Home Economics, Lake
Placid, N. Y'.
Dr. A. H. Doty, quarantine officer State of New York, New York City,
N. Y.
Thomas A. Edison, inventor electric light, phonograph, etc., Orange, N.J.
Charles W . Eliot, president, emeritus, Harvard University, Boston,
Mass.
Rev. W . G. Eliot, Jr., prominent clergyman, Portland, Oreg.
Dr. Livingston Farrand, executive secretary of the American Society
for the Study and Prevention of Tuberculosis, New Y'ork City. N. Y.
Hon. Charles J. Faulkner, ex-United States Senator from W est Vir
ginia, Washington, D. C.
Dr. Ilenry B. Favill, physician, president Municipal Voters’ League,
professor of Rush Medical College, Chicago, 111.
Dr. George J. Fisher, head of the directors of the Young Men's Chris
tian Association, New York City.
Prof. Irving Fisher, president, professor of political economy, New
Haven, Conn.
Horace Fletcher, author on the science of living, New York City.
Austin G. Fox, distinguished attorney, New York City.
Lee Frankel, head of the welfare department of the Metropolitan
Life Insurance Company, New York City.
Dr. John S. Fulton, secretary of the International Congress of H y
giene Demography; to be held in Washington at the invitation of the
United States Government, Washington, D. C.
President H. A . Garfield, president of W illiam s College, W illiam stown. Mass.
W illiam R. George, George Junior Republic, where the boys are
taught self-government, Freeville, N. Y.
Prof. Franklin H . Giddings, professor sociology, Columbia University,
New Y'ork City.
E. R. L. Gould. Ph. D., president City and Suburban Homes Com
pany, New York City.
Rev. Percy S. Grant, clergyman, New York City.
Dr. Luther H. Gulick, educator, president American Physical Educa
tion Association, author, New York City.
President A. T. Hadley, president Yale University, New Haven, Conn.
President G. Stanley Hail, president Clark University, ttMthosRry -on
adolescence, Worcester, Mass.
Miss Hazard, president Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass.
Prof. C. R. Henderson, professor sociology, University of Chicago,
Chicago, 111.
Mrs. John B. Henderson, author of Aristocracy of Health, Washing
ton. D. C.
Byron W . Holt, New York Refojrm Club, New York City.
Prof. L. Emmet Holt, secretary of the Rockefeller Institute, authority
care and feeding of children, diseases of infancy, etc, New York City.
Dr. J. N. Hurty, secretary state board of health, ex-president Ameri
can Public Health Association, Indianapolis, Ind.
Right Rev. John Ireland, archbishop, St. Paul, Minn.
Prof. M. E. Jaffa, professor, University of California, chemist and
expert on foods, Berkeley, Cal.
Jeremiah W . Jenks, professor of political economy, Cornell Univer
sity, ex-government expert, Ithaca, N. Y.
Dr. P. M. Jones, editor State Medical Journal, San Francisco, Cal.
President David Starr Jordan, president Leland Stanford University,
California.
Prof. Edwin O. Jordan, professor bacteriology, University of Chicago,
Chicago, 111.
35546— 8883
Dr. J. H . Kellogg, superintendent, Battle Creek Sanitarium, Battle
Creek, Mich.
Prof. S. A. Knopf, author and leading authority on tuberculosis, New
York City.
Dr. George M. Kober, dean Georgetown Medical College, professor of
hygmne, chairman of the President’s Home Commission, Washington,
James Law, professor of veterinary medicine, Cornell U niversity; exchairman United States Cattle Commission, etc., Ithaca, N. Y.
Samuel McCune Lindsay, director New York School of Philanthropy,
New York City.
Hon. Ben II. Lindsay, Judge Juvenile court, Denver, Colo.
Berkeley ^Cal
P1 :fessor ° f physiology, University of California,
‘°
f °S ' fejJS D ' L T ? > ex-Secretary of the Navy, Boston. Mass.
S. S. McClure, editor of McClure s Magazine. New York Citv.
Bowling GreenC
^KymaC^’ *ec*urer ° * t *le American Medical A s s o c i a t i o n ,
Hiram J. Messenger, actuary of the Travelers’ Life Insurance Com
pany, Hartford, Conn.
John Mitchell, labor leader, New York City.
Dr. Prince A. Morrow, president of the Society for Sanitary and
Moral Prophylaxis, New York City.
Dr. Richard C. Newton, writer, Montclair, N. J.
Prof. M. V. O’ Shea, professor of science and art of education, Uni
versity of Wisconsin, Madison, W is.
W alter II. Page, editor W orld’s Work, New York City.
Robert Treat Paine, president American Peace Society, Boston, Mass.
Henry Phipps, philanthropist. New York City.
Dr. C. O. Probst, secretary State Board of Health, Ohio, and presi
dent of the American Public Health Association, Columbus, Ohio.
Dr. Charles A. L. Reed, chairman of the legislative committee of the
American Medical Association, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Mrs. Ellen H. Richards, sanitary chemist. Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, author on the A rt of Right Living, Boston, Mass.
Prof. F. C. Robinson, professor, Bowdoin College, ex-president Ameri
can Public Health Association, Brunswick, Me.
Dr. D. A. Sargent, director of the Harvard gymnasium, Cambridge,
Mass.
W illiam II. Schicffelin, wholesale druggist, New York City.
Prof. Henry R. Seager, professor of political economy, Columbia Uni
versity, New York.
Hon. George Shiras, 3d, distinguished attorney at law, ex-member
of Congress, Washington, D. C.
Dr. George H. Simmons, editor Journal American Medical Associa
tion, Chicago, 111.
W jlliam F. Slocum, president Colorado College, Colorado Springs,
Colo.
Dr. Charles D. Smith, ex-president state board of health of Maine,
Portland, Me.
James Sprunt, cotton exporter, W ilmington, N. C.
Melville E. Stone, director of Associated Press, New York.
Nathan Straus, philanthropist, in respect to public baths and purify
ing the milk supply of New York City, New York City, N. Y.
J. E. Sullivan, president Amateur Athletic Union, New Y ork City.
’
W illiam H. Tolman, author, director of the Museum of Safety and
Sanitation, New York City.
Dr. Henry P. W alcott, president of the Massachusetts state board
of health and president International Hygiene Demography, Boston,
Mass.
Dr. W illiam H . Welch, president-elect of the American Medical Asso
ciation, professor of pathology, Johns-Hopkins University, etc., presi
dent of the advisory board of hygienic laboratory, Marine-Hospital Serv
ice. Baltimore, Md.
Prof. F. F. Wesbrook, dean of the medical school, University of
Minnesota, and member of the advisory board, Minneapolis, Minn.
Talcott W illiam s, editor and author, Philadelphia, Pa.
Robert S. Woodward, director of the Carnegie Institute, Washington,
D. C.
Calvin Hendrick, sanitary engineer, Baltimore, Md.
[S. 6049, Sixty-first Congress, second session.]
In the Senate
the United States. February
Mr.
wen
introduced the following bill, which was read twice and referred to the
Committee on Public Health and National Q uarantine:
of
1, 1910.
O
A bill establishing a department of public health, and for other purposes.
B e it enacted, etc., That there is hereby established a department of
public health under the supervision of the secretary of public health,
who shall be appointed by the President a Cabinet officer, by and with
the consent of the Senate, at a salary of $12,000 per annum, with like
tenure of office of other Cabinet officers.
Sec . 2. That all departments and bureaus belonging to any depart
ment, excepting the Department of War and the Department of the Navy,
affecting the medical, surgical, biological, or sanitary service; or any
questions relative thereto, shall be combined in one department, to be
known as the department of public health, particularly including
therein the Bnrenn of Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service, the
medical officers of the Revenue-Cutter Service, the medical referee, the
assistant medical referee, the surgeons and examiners of the Pension
Office; all physicians and medical officers in the service of the Indian
Bureau or the Department of the Interior at old soldiers’ homes, at
the Government Hospital for the Insane, and the Freedman’s Hospital
and other hospitals of the United States ; the Bureau of Entomology,
the Bureau of Chemistry and of Animal Industry of the Department
of Agriculture; the hospitals of the Immigration Bureau of the Depart
ment of Commerce and L ab or; the emergency relief in the Government
Printing Office, and every other agency of the United States for the pro
tection of the health of the people of the United States, or of animal
life, be, and are hereby transferred to the department of public health,
which shall hereafter exercise exclusive Jurisdiction and supervision
thereof.
ec
That the official records, papers, furniture, fixtures, and all
matters, all property of any kind or description pertaining to the busi
ness of any such bureau, office, department, or branch of the public
service is hereby transferred to the department of public health.
ec 4. That the secretary of public health shall have supervision
over the department of public health, and shall be assisted by an as
sistant secretary of public health, to be appointed by the President, by
S . 3.
S .
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
and with the advice and consent of the Senate, at a salary of $6,000 a
year, with such duties as shall he prescribed by the secretary not in
consistent with law.
.
,
S e c . 5. That the secretary of public health shall be authorized to
appoint such subordinates as may be found necessary. There shall
bfe a chief clerk appointed, at a salary not to exceed $3,000 a year, and
such other clerks as may from time to time be authorized by Congress.
S e c . 6 . That the officers and employees of the public service trans
ferred to the department of public health shall, subject to further action
by Congress, receive the salaries and allowances now provided by law.
" S ec . 7. That it shall be the duty and province of such department
of public health to supervise all matters within the control of the
Federal Government relating to the public health and to diseases of
animal life.
S ec . S. That it shall gather data concerning such m atters; impose
and enforce quarantine regulations ; establish chemical, biological, and
other standards necessary to the efficient administration of said de
partment : and give due publicity to the same.
S e c . 9. That the secretary of public health shall establish a bureau
of biology, a bureau of chemistry, a bureau of veterinary service, a
bureau of sanitary engineering, reporting such proposed organizations
to Congress for suitable legislation relative thereto.
Sec . 10. That all unexpended appropriations and appropriations made
for the ensuing year shall be available on and after July 1, 1910, for
the department of public health, where such appropriations have been
made to be used by any branch of the public service transferred by this
act to the department of public. health. It shall be the duty of the
secretary of public health to provide, on proper requisition, any med
ical, sanitary, or other service needed of his department required in
another department of the Government.
Sec . 11. That any other department requiring medical, surgical, sani
tary, or other similar service shall apply to the secretary of public
hea'lth therefor wherever it is practicable.
Sec . 12. That all officers or employees of the Government transferred
by this act to the department of public health will continue to dis
charge their present duties under the present organization until July 1,
1910, and after that time until otherwise directed by the secretary of
public health or under the operation of law.
S ec . 13. That all laws or parts of laws in conflict with this act are
hereby repealed.
W ed n esd a y, M a y 25, 1010.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, while awaiting the return of the
Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. La F ollette ] I wish to make a
few comments on the bill (S. 6049) establishing a department
of public health, and for other purposes.
Mr. President, I have been amazed, and I suppose that every
Senator on this floor has been, to receive many telegrams from
“ homeopaths,” “ osteopaths,” “ eclectics,” “ chiropractics,” and
practitioners and believers in Christian Science and suggestive
therapeutics, and from other good citizens, protesting against
a department of public health apparently upon the unfounded
notion that the bill introduced by me (S. 6049) proposed or
made possible some interference by the Federal Government
with the practice of medicine and constituted a possible invasion
of the medical freedom of the citizen to employ whom he
pleased when sick. None of the protests point out the language
of the bill by which this could possibly happen, and for the ob
vious reason that no such language exists in the bill. None of
these protests suggest any amendment to correct either an error
of omission or commission in the bill. They simply protest
against an interference with the medical freedom of the citizen,
with which the bill contemplates no interference, with which the
Federal statutes can not interfere within any State.
I understand that during the last week a large number o f
so-called “ taxpayers and voters’ ” associations have been or
ganized with many members in several States of the Union for
the purpose of opposing a department of public health.
1 am informed that the sudden and surprising interest of the
“ taxpayers and voters ” of the United States who are or
ganized in this artificial manner and the active interest alleged
or manifested of the “ homeopaths ” and of the “ osteopaths ”
and of the “ eclectics ” and of the great variety of those who
have special views with regard to the various methods of heal
ing the sick has taken place within seven days, and like a
flash of lightning telegrams are coming in from Maine to Cali
fornia. The chairman of the Committee on Public Health and
National Quarantine of the Senate received a very large number
of them. Such sudden universality of disapproval o f a depart
ment of public health on such an unsound theory is astounding;
it is more— it is extremely suspicious; it is obviously artificial.
It is perfectly apparent that somebody is spending a very
large amount of money on this sudden jiropaganda; it can
hardly be doubted that somebody, in gross errQr, is advising
the “ homeopaths,” the “ osteopaths,” the “ eclectics ” that their
right to practice medicine is about to be invaded by the Federal
Government.
The agency through which this propaganda is being carried
on against a department of public health is carrying the flag
of “ medical freedom.”
35546— 8883 *
15
And an active and authorized representative of this organiza
tion in the Washington Post is quoted as saying (Friday morn
ing, May 20, 1910) :
I believe the creation of a Federal department of health would mean
the abridgment of long-cherished rights of the people, which would
mean the taking away of the enjoyment of one of the most sacred rights
for which man has had to contend— the right to select the practitioner
of his choice in the hour of sickness. If such a bill became law, hun
dreds of practitioners would be thrown out of practice— men who have
succeeded in curing persons who have been given up by physicians. It
would particularly affect Christian Science healers and osteopaths. In
their line, both these classes of practitioners undoubtedly have done a
World of good, and they should not by unfair legislation be outlawed.
It should make no difference whether we believe in Christian Science,
osteopathy, or any other practice, the people should have the privilege
of choosing their own practitioners.
They should not be prohibited
from so doing by legislation.
This is an astonishing and utterly impossible interpretation
of the bill which I introduced in the Senate of the United States
proposing a department of public health.
The bill itself merely brings the various bureaus affecting the
public health in one body, under one head, without changing
the character o f the activities or authorities of such existing
bureaus, to wit:
A ll departments and bureaus belonging to any department (excepting
the Army and Navy) affecting the medical, surgical, biological, or sani
tary service, or any questions relative thereto, shall be combined in one
department.
The greatest of these bureaus dealing with the public health
is the Bureau of Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service,
but various public hospitals, the Bureau of Chemistry and of
Pure Foods and Drugs, and Bureau of Meat Inspection, including
some 16 laboratories of the Federal Government, are to be
transferred to one department by this proposed bill.
Nobody has heretofore protested against the existence of
these bureaus or their functions.
Nobody has declared them unconstitutional.
Nobody has charged that they in anywise have interfered
with the homeopaths, osteopaths, eclectics, Christian Scientists,
or any other school of healing.
Nobody has contended that they would do so, or has desired
that they should be abolished for fear that they would interfere
with the local practitioners in the gentle art of healing.
No man who has any knowledge of constitutional law would
believe it possible that the Federal Government could invade
the police powers of the State, or in any way interfere with the
liberties of the citizen or of the local practitioner.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly passed upon this question,
and held that the States, under their police powers, exclusively
control such matters. All lawyers are familiar with these prin
ciples. The leading cases I insert in the R e c o r d for the con
venience of those who may not be familiar with the matter:
United States v.
W all., 36) : United
Cruikshank (92 U.
Rights case (19 U.
De W itt (9 'Wall., 41) ; Slaughterhouse cases (16
States v. Reese (92 U. S., 214) ; United States v.
S., 542) ; Munn v. Illinois (94 U. S., 113) ; Civil
S., 3 ) .
All citizens know that the States exclusively control the issu
ance of licenses to practice medicine.
Nobody every heard of the Federal Government considering
such a matter or pretending to have any interest in it.
Every Member of the Senate and of the House of Representa
tives knows that the Federal Government has nothing to do
with the local practitioner nor the hostilities which may exist
between different schools of medicine, if any such do exist.
I wish, however, to put in the R ecord my assurances to the
members of the medical profession, of whatever school of heal
ing, a few facts which I trust may abate any apprehension on
this score.
First. Senate bill 6049, proposing a department of public
health, was drawn by me without the knowledge of any school
of medicine or of any medical association. I was greatly
pleased to find that many members of the various medical
schools and associations, including homeopaths and eclectics,
approved the bill.
I have been pleased to observe the wholesale cordial support
of osteopaths and men of all schools of healing for a department
of public health. The bill contains no provision either directly
or indirectly interfering with any school of healing, whether
osteopaths, 'homeopaths, eclectics, Christian Scientists, or in
those who reject all medicine. It could not accomplish such a
purpose if it had the intent, as the Federal Government has no
such police powers within the State, the States alone issuing
licenses to control the practice of medicine and religious and
personal freedom being a constitutional right in which every
body believes.
16
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
As the author of this bill I wish to say that I believe the
more a man knows about the laws of health the less drugs
he takes. I have employed homeopaths and osteopaths and
allopaths as well to treat myself and the members of my fam
ily. I have studied the doctrine of suggestive therepeutics and
of Christian Science with great interest and respect, and cor
dially indorse Horace Fletcher as the best doctor of them all.
I stand firmly for medical freedom and for the right of the
citizen to select his own medical or spiritual adviser.
The department of health, proposed by me, has for its ob
ject the prevention of sickness, and, therefore, taking business
away from all doctors.
The members of the profession whose hearts are constantly
wrung by the grief and sorrow at the bedside of sickness and
death naturally desire to prevent bad health and illness, even
if it be to their financial loss, as it evidently is, and every
member of the noblest of professions will stand for the de
partment of health when its purposes and its constitutional
limitations are well understood.
The absurd theory that any medical association could, by
any possibility, take charge of the health activities o f the Gov-
eminent of the United States and interfere with the medical
freedom either of citizen or practitioner is preposterous.
It is to the honor of all the members of this sympathetic and
self-sacrificing profession that they are so largely interested in
preventing disease and thus diminishing the need for their own
employment. All disciples of every school of healing, I should
think, should engage in a generous rivalry to put an end to
disease and prevent tuberculosis, typhoid and fellow fevers,
bubonic plague, pneumonia, and the many diseases which are
known to be preventable.
This is about all a department of health can hope to assist
in, and it can only do this by cooperating with the States
on constitutional lines in educating the people on the ele
mentary laws of health and well-ascertained facts relating to
the prevention of the wholesale sickness and death of our
people.
It is beyond belief that any of our good citizens engaged in
curing the sick would seriously oppose the reasonable exercise
of either the State or National activities within their constitu
tional limits for the prevention of the illness and death of our
people.
35546— 8883 *
o
ON PROMOTING INTERNATIONAL PEACE BY
LIMITING THE NAVAL ARMAMENT AND
DIRECTLY SEEKING INTERNA
TIONAL PEACE
REMARKS
OF
IION. ROBERT L. OWEN
OF O K L A H O M A
IN THE
SENATE OF TILE UNITED STATES
MONDAY, MAY 23, 1910
$
WASHINGTON
1910
44563 -9074
REMARKS
O
P
SENATOR
ROBERT
L. OWEN.
On promoting international peace by limiting the naval armament and
directly seeking international peace.
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P r e sid e n t : I wish to give my adherence to the proposed
amendment of the Senator from Ohio [Mr. B urton ].
I agree
that it would be better for international peace if we should
no longer continue to enlarge the great navy, which we already
have established, the maintenance of which constitutes a very
heavy tax on the people of the United State's. To the arguments
which have been advanced by the Senator from Ohio, by the
Senator from [Minnesota [Mr. C l a p p ], and by the Senator from
Maine [Mr. H a le ], I wish to give my approval. I believe they
are substantially right.
Always when the naval bill comes up the press is filled with
alluring arguments about the conservation of peace by making
preparation for war. Slowly I have come to believe, and I do
believe, that these arguments in the public press are not in the
interest of peace, but are in the interest of those who have
something to sell.
Under the message of the President of the United States two
years ago I supported the proposition to greatly enlarge this navy
when the naval bill came up at a previous session. I did so, be
lieving that we were in danger of some foreign complication. I
have gradually changed my mind about that. I do not believe
that we are in any danger whatever. The tremendous financial
power of the United States, its far-reaching commercial con
nections with every nation of the earth, its ties by blood with
every nation of Europe, make the idea of war well-nigh im
possible.
2
445G3—9070
3
I have been led to believe that when we are making these
enormous expenditures—$130,000,000 on this insurance policy
against war—it would be well to appropriate a small amount
directly for the purpose of promoting international peace, and
I propose to offer an amendment that one-tenth of
1
per cent
of the amount in this bill shall be used by the President of the
United States for the direct purpose of promoting international
peace. It is only a small amount; it is but one dollar out of a
thousand, and since this bill is on the basis of insurance, I
hope that everybody who believes in the insurance system will
agree to the expenditure of one dollar out of a thousand in the
direct promotion of peace.
I simply rose, Mr. President, to give my support to the doc
trine that the time has come when we ought to set an example
to the nations of the world, and demonstrate that w do not
re
have any desire for aggression; that we do not feel inspired by
ambition; that we are already beginning to curtail this vast
naval upbuilding, and that we offer an example of limiting naval
armament to the other nations of the world.
Actions speak louder than words with nations as well as
with men. 1 have but little confidence in the man who invites
me to peace while he runs for a gun. We have no sufficient
ground to invite the other nations of the world to limit their
naval armaments when we go on spending millions and tens of
millions, and have now a naval budget of $130,000,000.
We
ought to put a limitation upon naval expenditures, and we ought
directly, as the nation best fitted to do so in all the world, to
promote international peace, not by the possible suggestion that
we are ready for war, but we ought to do it by direct action.
We ought to invite the nations of the world to limit their naval
armaments. I know of no proposal in the Senate for that pur
pose. Why do not those who desire the limitation of our own
naval armament and who are in control of the affairs of the
Senate pass a resolution through the Senate of the United
States declaring in favor of the limitation of naval armaments?
Those who are in control of the affairs of government, those
who are charged with the duty to the people of the United
44563— 9074
4
States of directing the affairs o f government, those who can,
if they will, put upon the statute books the proper steps to
ward maintaining universal peace, owe it to their country and
they owe it to the people of the world to take the first positive,
direct step, as a national legislature, calling for universal peace
and authorizing the officers of this Government to take those
steps which are essential and necessary to promote the peace
of the nations of the world. We are, as I have said, the bestfitted nation on earth to do that, both by great financial and
commercial power and by geographical position, and because in
our Nation center the ties of blood with every nation on the
earth, and they would listen to us more readily than they would
to those who are of an alien tongue, and who have no ties of
blood.
Mr. President, I simply wish to give my support to the amend
ment proposed by the Senator from Ohio, limiting the building
of new battle ships to one Dreadnought.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Mr. OWEN. I offer the amendment which I send to the desk.
The Secretary. On page 63, after line 17, insert:
That a sum equal to one-tenth of 1 per cent of the amount annually
appropriated for the naval service by this act is hereby appropriated as
a continuing annual appropriation to be used by the President of the
United States in promoting international peace and in promoting an
international agreement to limit the construction of naval armaments.
Mr. OWEN. I call for the yeas and nays----- Mr. PERKINS. Mr. President, I feel constrained to make a
point of order on the amendment.
The VICE-PRESIDENT. What is the point of order?
Mr. PERKINS. That there is no estimate for it; that it pro
poses new legislation on an appropriation bill, and is in viola
tion of Rule XVI.
The VICE-PRESIDENT.
order.
4 45 63 — 9074
The Chair sustains the point of
o
SPEECH OF
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
OF OKLAHOMA
IN THE
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
JUNE 9, 1910
OPPOSING THE PROSECUTION UNDER
THE ANTITRUST LAWS OF LABORING
MEN WHO ORGANIZE TO BETTER THE
CONDITIONS OF LABOR
9
WASHINGTON
1910
5 052 7-9 304
/
SPEECH
OF
I IOX. E O B E E T L. O WE N .
The Senate being in Committee of the Whole and haying under con
sideration the bill (H. R. 25552) making appropriations for sundry
civil expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1911, and for other purposes—
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P r e s i d e n t : I desire to express my regret that the com
mittee should have struck out the proviso of the House bill
which provided that the appropriation of $2 0 0 , 0 0 0 should not be
used in prosecuting labor organizations under the antitrust
laws. The House proviso reads:
That no part of this money shall be spent in the prosecution of any
organization or individual for entering into any combination or agree
ment having in view the increasing of wages, shortening of hours or
bettering the condition of labor or for any act done in furtherance
thereof not in itself unlawful.
That does seem to me to be the description of a most inno
cent form of organization, and surely such organizations or
their legitimate objects could not be within the purpose of the
statute of the United States to forbid the formation of great
trust organizations to monopolize trade in this country. The
antitrust law is intended to prevent great combinations of
capital from depriving men of their just rights.
It is true that the labor organizations which have been built
up in this country have in some cases been improvident in some
of their actions; but they have been in a large measure excited
to such efforts in order to protect themselves and obtain a suffi
cient amount of the proceeds of their own labor to provide the
needs of their families. These are organizations of poor men,
men who work by the day, who earn their daily bread with
their hands. The purpose of the antitrust law was not to sup
press organizations of that kind.
I can not help thinking of the American Tobacco Company
and the effect upon the people down in the tobacco-raising
country. The tobacco trust, having by monopoly become the
sole buyer of tobacco, fixes the price below the cost of produc-
2
50527— 9304
3
tion, and has driven the poor farmers who raise tobacco to
desperation, and even to criminal acts, in their blind efforts to
make a living. The ordinary laws which operate to suppress
criminal acts are in full operation and will punish the poor
oppressed farmers. If they burn a barn they are guilty of
arson. If they commit a crime through their Night Eiders’
organization they violate the ordinary criminal laws, and there
is abundant punishment for the criminal act.
But the antitrust laws were not intended to suppress labor,
but are necessary and were intended to protect the laborer and
the consumer from a conspiracy to defraud them. They were
intended to prevent labor and the consumers from being op
pressed.
This proviso passed by the House of Representatives is cer
tainly a most reasonable interpretation of what the law ought
to be and a direction to the Executive not to use the appro
priation to prosecute labor organizations for combining to in
crease wages, and so forth. If they commit any act that is
unlawful, there is abundant means of punishment; but to
prevent the laboring men of the country from organizing for
the protection of themselves and their families in earning a
reasonable livelihood, to combine to increase wages, to shorten
hours of labor, to better their condition; and to break up those
organizations by treating them in the same way as the law
treats a great conspiracy of organized capital against which
the antitrust laws were directed, I think is unfair and unjust.
I do hope that the committee will not insist upon striking
out these words inserted by the House. I think they ought to
be allowed to remain, and I hope they will remain.
The huge organizations of capital in restraint of trade,
raising prices on the necessities of life and imposing on the
people for the mere sake of ambition, greed, or cold and cruel
avarice, needs restraint both on moral, ethical, and legal
grounds.
Organization of laboring men to protect women and children
from starvation, from exposure, sickness, and death, are justi
fied on every standpoint and should be encouraged.
The antitrust laws were not intended to be used against
labor so protecting itself; and if they were, you now have an
opportunity the Republican party should gladly seize, to correct
and amend such laws in the interest of labor if the Repub
licans really and truly are the friends of labor.
I fear, Mr. President, that organized capital, which con
tributes money to keep the Republican party in power, will
50527— 9304
4
control the vote o f the Senate against the poor laboring
ganizations. I pray you not to vote against labor.
*
*
*
*
The result was announced-—yeas
*
*
34, nays 16 , as
*
follow s:
Y E A S— 34.
Borah
Bourne
Brandegee
Bristow
Brown
Bulkeley
Burnham
Burrows
Burton
Carter
Clapp
Clark, Wyo.
Crane
Crawford
Cullom
Dick
Dixon
du Pont
Bacon
Burkett
Chamberlain
Dolliver
Fletcher
Frazier
Gore
Jones
Aldrich
Bailey
Bankhead
Beveridge
Bradley
Briggs,
Clarke, Ark.
Clay
Culberson
Cummins
Curtis
Daniel
Davis
Depew
Dillingham
Elkins
Foster
Guggenheim
Hughes
Johnston
La Follette
Lodge
Flint
Frye
Gallinger
Gamble
Hale
Heyburn
Kean
McEnery
Nelson
Oliver
Perkins
Smoot
Stephenson
Stone
Warren
Wetmore
NAYS— 16.
NOT
Martin
Newlands
Owen
Page
Percy
Simmons
Smith, S. C.
Warner
VOTING— 42.
Lorimer
McCumber
Money
Nixon
Overman
Paynter
Penrose
Piles
Purcell
Rayner
Richardson
So the amendment was agreed to.
D0527— 9304
O
Root
Scott
Shively
Smith, Md.
Smith, Mich.
Sutherland
Taliaferro
Taylor
Tillman
“ No ele&ion of a Senator clearly shown to have been based in any
degree upon bribery or corrupt practices should be allowed to stand.
I think the election of United States Senators should be made and
kept above suspicion.”
R EM A R K S
OF
Hon. Robert L. Owen
A United States Senator from Oklahoma
ON
The Right of William Lorimer to a Seat in the
United States Senate.
,
January 9 1911.
Mr. Owen said:
Mr. President, on May 21, 1908, I introduced Senate joint resolution No. 91, for the
submission o f a constitutional amendment providing for the election o f Senators by a direct
vote o f the people.
On May 23, 1908, I urged the Senate to act, showing that 27 States had at that time
sought relief in this matter. Senate resolution 91 was never reported by the Committee
on Privileges and Elections.
A fter the convening o f the Sixty-first Congress I introduced another Senate resolution,
No. 41, for the submission to the States o f the Union o f a constitutional amendment provid
ing for the election o f Senators by direct vote o f the people.
On May 31, 19x0, I again urged this reform on the attention o f the Senate, and was
prevented the privilege o f a vote, and the committee has never reported on Senate joint
resolution 41.
The House o f Representatives on five different occasions has passed a bill providing
for this reform— in 1892; July 21, 1894; May 11, 1898: April 13, 1900; and February 13, 1902,
the last vote unanimously, or no one opposing.
On May 31, 1910, I pointed out to the Senate that every State in the Union had acted
favorably in this matter, except the New England States, New York, Delaware, and West
Virginia, by passing resolutions addressed to Congress seeking for this reform, or by
actually nominating Senators by a popular primary vote.
And that even in the 9 States excepted there were many evidences that the people
favored election o f Senators byjdirect vote. The Democratic Party in Connecticut, Massa
chusetts, New Hampshire, New y ork , and Rhode Island,exnresslv declared for it in 1910.
The National Democratic Party, the National Prohibition Party, the National Peoples
Party, have all declared in favor o f i t ; the American Federation o f Labor, the National
Grange, the Society o f Equity, the Farmers’ Educational Cooperation Union, and other great
organizations o f the country have declared in favor o f it. And I insisted, Mr. President,
that this reform was needed for the following reasons, among others:
First. That it would prevent deadlocks in State legislatures.
Second. It would compel candidates to be subjected to the severe scrutiny o f a cam
paign before the people and promote the selection o f the best qualified men.
Third. That it would prevent interference with State legislation by violent ocntests over
the Senatorship.
/
2
Fourth. That it would prevent improper use o f maney and the corruption o f legislatures.
These matters I now refer to in the light o f the report o f the Committee on Privileges
and Elections on the Senate resolution directing an investigation o f certain charges made
against Mr. W illiam Lorimer, o f Illinois, where it is obvious these evils have occurred.
(Proceedings, p. 638.)
On June 20, 1910, the Committee on Privileges and Elections was directed by Senate
resolution 264 to report to the Senate whether in the election o f Mr. W illiam Lorimer as a
Senator o f the United States from the State o f Illinois—
There were used or employed corrupt methods or practices.
On December 21, 1910, the report o f the committee was submitted to the Senate and will
be found in the Record o f that date. (S. Rept. No. 942, 61st Cong., 3d sess.)
The Committee on Privileges and Elections has reached the conclusion that the election
of Mr. Lorimer was not invalidated by any sufficient evidence of corrupt practices.
I can not acquiesce in the conclusions o f the committee.
In the first place the committee concludes as a principle o f law, upon the precedents o f
cases heretofore before the Senate, that in order to invalidate the election o f a Senator on
account o f bribery it must be made to appear:
First. That the person elected participated in one or more acts o f bribery, or attempted
bribery, or sanctioned or encouraged the same, or,
Second. That enough votes were obtained for him by bribery or corrupt practices to
change the result o f the election.
In my judgment the better ethical rule, upon which the Senate should properly stand,
is that no election o f a Senator clearly shown to have been based in any degree upon bribery
or corrupt practices should be allowed to stand. 1 think that the election o f United States
Senators should be made and kept above suspicion. In my opinion no elected officer in city,
State, or Nation should be allowed to take his seat or to hold it where it was proven he was
the beneficiary o f any corrupt practice. The Senate is in honor bound to set a high example
in this matter, and I refuse emphatically to acquiesce in any lower standard than this. The
country is in serious need o f a good example. Look at Adams County, O h io; over a thousand
citizens indicted for selling their votes. Adopting the doctrine I suggest will tend to put an
end to corrupt practices. The need is obvious.
Mr. President, in Great Britain if a single vote is bribed or any money unlawfully spent
in electing a member o f Parliament, his election is absolutely annulled. W hy should the
United States Senate, which is regarded by our people as the most distinguished legislative
body in the world, adopt a lower ethical and moral standard than the British House o f
Commons ?
In the second place, I think the evidence, even on the very narrow theory o f the com
mittee that it must be shown that enough votes were obtained by bribery to change the result,
would justify the invalidation o f the elecion o f Mr. Lorimer. Mr. Lorimer was compelled
to have 103 votes as a constitutional majority. He received 108, and o f these at least 10 are
already shown not to deserve to be counted on account o f corrupt practices, and in my
judgment the investigation was by no means as searching and complete as it should have
been, no examination having been made into the jackpot conspiracy, a coalition obviously in
numbers strong enough to obtain or defeat measures, which was confessed by White to be a
consideration moving him to vote for Lorimer, and so forth.
I submit a brief abstract o f the evidence filed in the proceedings, referring to pages o f
the record by number. In considering the evidence o f bribe givers and bribe takers and their
evasions and falsehoods, I have endeavored to ascertain the actual truth as evidenced by
circumstantial evidence, sound reason, and common sense. !n spite o f all denials the
witnesses corroborate each other in the essential facts.
( 1 ) D. W. HOLSTLAW AND ( 2 ) JOHN BRODERICK.
D. W . Holstlaw was a senator from the forty-second district in the Legislature o f
Illinois. He appeared before the Senate committee and on his oath declares that Senator
John Broderick, another senator ( o f the forty-sixth district) in the General Assembly o f
Illinois, promised him money if he would vote for Mr. Lorimer (p. 198), and the next
morning after this promise, on May 26, 1909, he voted for Mr. L orimer, and that there-
f
3
111
after, on the 16th o f June, 1909, in Chicago,
., John Broderick paid him $2,500 in currency,,
and he deposited the same with the State Bank o f Chicago,
., to the credit o f the Holstlaw
Bank, o f Iuka,
. (p. 201). He is confirmed by the bank officer who received the money,
Mr. Jarvis O. Newton, and by the deposit slip o f the State Bank o f Chicago,
., June 16,
1909, showing that this amount was deposited in currency (p. 411).
John Broderick was twice called before the committee and withdrawn without testify
ing (pp. 422, 508), and finally was summoned at the instance o f Albert S. Austrian, counsel
for the Chicago Tribune, who assumed the burden o f presenting evidence (p. 547).
Broderick refused to answer questions (p. 557) on the avowed ground that he might
incriminate himself, and is under indictment at Springfield,
., for bribery in the
Lorimer case.
His testimony was obviously insincere and untrue.
D. W . Holstlaw further testified that he received $700 additional from John Broderick,
who told him that there was that much coming to him. In my judgment, if it were merely a
question o f counting votes neither the vote (1 ) o f D. W . Holstlaw nor o f (2 ) John
Broderick should be counted; but, in my opinion, it is not a question o f counting votes; it
is a question o f invalidating the election o f a United States Senator, where gross corruption
and bribery is established in one or more instances.
111
111
111
111
(31 H. J. C BECKEM
.
EYER.
H. J. C. Beckemeyer, member o f the Forty-sixth General Assembly o f Illinois and a
member o f the Lee O’ Neill Browne faction, who voted for Mr. Lorimer, appeared before
the Senate committee and made oath that on or about May 25 or 26, 1909, he entered into an
arrangement that proved to be corrupt with Lee O’ Neill Browne (the leader o f the Browne
faction o f 37 members o f the Democratic Party in the lower house) ; that he voted for Mr.
Lorimer on May 26, 1909; and that he received, on June 21, 1909, in St. Louis, Mo., at the
Southern Hotel, $1,000 from Lee O ’Neill Browne for his vote for Mr. LorimE (p. 227),
r
and that on July 15, 1909, at the Southern Hotel, St. Louis, Mo., he received $900 from
Robert E. Wilson, the intimate friend and representative o f Lee O’ Neill Browne, on the
same account (p. 228). Beckemeyer deposited $500 o f this money from W ilson in the
Commercial Trust Co., St. Louis (p. 228).
( 4 ) MICHAEL S. LINK.
Michael S. Link, a member o f the Forty-sixth General Assembly o f Illinois, a member of
the Browne faction, under oath, stated in like manner before the Senate committee that he
met Lee O ’Neill Browne in St. Louis at the Southern Hotel on June 21, 1909, and received
$1,000 from him (p. 281) ; that he met Robert E. Wilson, the intimate friend and representa
tive o f Browne, in St. Louis, Mo., on July 15, 1909, and got $900 from Wilson at the same
time and place as Beckemeyer (p. 284). Link pretended to think this “ campaign money,”
although it is obvious it was for the same purpose as that confessed by White and
Beckemeyer.
( 5 ) CH
ARLES A. WHITE, ( 6 ) L E O
E ’NEILL BROW E, ( 7 ) R E W
N
. . ILSON.
Charles A. White, a member o f the house, Forty-sixth General Assembly o f the State
o f Illinois, and a member o f the Browne faction, on his oath, appeared before the Senate
committee. He stated that he had made an agreement with Lee O ’Neill Browne on May 25,
J . to vote for Mr. Lorimer, for $1,000 and was to have as much more from other sources
(P)) repeatedly referred to as the “ jack p o t;” that he was taken in on the money derived
from other sources, the jack pot,” as a part o f the consideration for voting for Mr.
Lorimer; that Browne paid him $1,000—first, $100 at Springfield,
.; $50 in Chicago,
.;
and $850 in Chicago,
. (p. 52), on June 17, I9°9> and that he received in like manner $900
from Robert E. W ilson (p. 81), a member o f the Browne faction, the intimate friend and
representative o f Lee O ’Neill Browne, at the Southern Hotel, St. Louis, Mo., on July 15.
1909, in accordance with Browne’s previous promise.
White’s testimony is corroborated by Thomas P. Kirkpatrick, who said that White
deposited for safe-keeping a package o f money marked “ Eight hundred (800.00) dollars”
with Mr. Hollender, cashier o f the Grand Leader Store in St. Louis, Mo., in the latter part
909
49
111
111
111
4
o f June, 1909 (p. 223), and White is otherwise corroborated by accounting for the time, place,
and amount o f his various expenditures o f this money received by him from Browne and
Wilson. For these reasons, I believe, that if it were merely a matter o f counting votes, which,
in my judgment, it is not, that the votes o f Charles A. White, H. J. C. Beckemeyer, Michael
S. Link, Robert E. Wilson, and Lee O’ Neill Browne should not be counted in favor o f the
election o f Mr. L o r im ER. It is shown in the evidence that Robert E. Wilson wrote letters
falsely dated back a year so as to appear to have been written to Beckemeyer on June 26.
1909; and to Link on June 26, 1909, arranging the St. Louis meeting for the purpose o f a
banquet for Browne, when, as a matter o f fact, these letters were falsely dated and falsely
conceived and agreed upon between them, having been written in 1910, after the disclosure of
this corruption was threatened.
White testified (p. 81) that Lee O ’ Neill Browne had on a blue cloth belt July 17, 1909.
Briggs House, Chicago, the day he paid \V hite, in which he said he had $30,000. Thirty of
the Browne faction voted for Lorimer (p. 639).
Lee O’ Neill Browne was indicted for bribery o f Charles A. White in the Lorimer case
(p. 618)— the first jury was a hung jury, and by the second jury he was acquitted, but it should
be remembered also that out o f the second trial, at which he was acquitted, his attorney,
Erbstein, was indicted for bribing the jury that acquitted Browne. Moreover, the venue of
the cases above cited in which Browne had corruptly paid money to Beckemeyer and Link et
al. was laid in the State o f Missouri, and that W ilson’ s payments were likewise in the State
o f Missouri, the crafty purpose o f which seem sobvious, i. e., to prevent any indictment in
Illinois. On the iloor o f the legislature, when the Lorimer vote was up, Browne, in his
speech, said, “ You can not cash dreams,” to which Representative Engilsh replied, “ He might
cash votes” (p. 636).
(8 )
CHARLES
w r*
V »
S. LUKE.
Charles S. Luke, a member o f the Browne faction o f the Forty-sixth General Assembly
He voted for Mr. Lorimer May 26, 1909. He met Lee O ’Neill
Browne in St. Louis, Mo., at the Southern Hotel on June 21, 1909, at the same time Browne
paid Beckemeyer and Link. It is shown that he exhibited $950 to his wife immediately
afterwards without explaining its source (p. 495 ).
It is shown that he met Robert E. Wilson, Browne’ s intimate friend and representative,
at the Southern Hotel on July 15, 1909, when other bribe takers were paid.
Charles A. White, in his original statement o f this case, declares that Charles S. Luke
was angry at getting only $900 at St. Louis, and stated to him that he could have gotten
$1,500 at the beginning o f the session and was sorry that he did not take i t ; that he
intimated to Luke that he, White, had not received anything, but that Luke answered
by saying:
•
o f Illinois, is now dead.
Y e s; you did. You got ,$ 1, 0 0 0 , just what we all got except the leaders, and it is to be expected
they got more than we (p. 1 1 ).
Under these circumstances, if it were merely a matter o f counting votes, I do not think
the vote o f Charles S. Luke should be counted for Mr. L o r im e r .
(9 )
JOSEPH B. CLARK.
Joseph B. Clark was also a m e m b e r o f Browne’s faction who voted for Mr. L o r im e r
May 26, 1909.
The evidence shows that Joseph B. Clark was in St. Louis at the Southern Hotel on
June 21, 1909, although he denies it, and that also he was present and met Robert E. Wilson
in St. Louis on July 15, 1909. He was present when Robert E. Wilson paid Beckemeyer
$900; he it was who by agreement received Robert E. W ilson’s manufactured false letter of
:9 io „ antedated about a year, and which was prepared with the intention o f establishing a
false excuse for the meeting held in St. Louis on July 15, 1909.
Beckemeyer testified that Mr. Clark agreed with him that it might be all right for
Beckemeyer to deny having been in St. Louis on July 15 , 1909. showing that Clark agreed
to false evidence in regard to the St. Louis meeting.
D. W . H oltslaw states that Clark had told him that they would get som ething out
o f the furniture deal, a grossly corrupt transaction for which Clark is now under
aC
1
5
indictment. Under all the circumstances, I believe that Joseph B. Clark, as a member
of the Browne faction, the “ gang” Beckemeyer referred to, in replying that he would'
go with it wherever it went (p. 2 5 8 ), was also a bribe taker, and that his vote ought not
to be counted.
(I0 )
jspr*
v«
HENRY A. SHEPHARD.
H enry A. Shephard, mem ber o f the Forty-sixth General Assem bly of Illinois, was
a m em ber o f the Brow ne faction, w ho voted for Mr. Lorim er M ay 26, 1909. He also
met Lee O ’ Neill Brow ne at the Southern H otel, St. Louis, on June 21, 1909, precisely
the same place, and at the same time that the payments were made to those w ho have
confessed, or w ho have been proven to be bribe takers and bribe givers. Imm ediately
at the time, but before Beckem eyer received his $1,000 from Browne, and as he was
goin g into B row ne’s room , H enry A. Shephard was just com in g out o f B row ne’s
room (p. 227).
Fie was at the m eeting with R obert E. W ilson with the bribe takers at the Southern
Hotel, St. Louis, M o., on July 15, 1909, and went into the fam ous bathroom with W ilson
just before Charles A. W hite went into the same bathroom and g ot $900, but Shephard
attempts the silly explanation that his visit to the bathroom related exclusively to
answerftig a question by R. E. W ilson as to the name o f a lady w ho had taken dinner
with H enry A. Shephard months before at Springfield,
. A ll o f the evidence will
justify the belief that H enry A. Shephard, as a mem ber o f the “ gang,” was paid the
same amount as the other mem bers o f the “ gang.” His absurd explanation o f his going
to St. Louis to meet with this party o f men, o f his goin g into the bathroom to tell the
name o f a lady with w hom he had taken dinner at a public hotel months before, is
unworthy o f belief.
H enry A. Shephard, however, explains his vote for Mr. Lorim er on the ground that
Mr. Lorim er made him a personal prom ise (P roceedings, p. 318) that he would do all
in his pow er to prevent Mr. Richards, the postm aster o f Jerseyville,
., or his deputy,
Mr. Becker, from being appointed as postm aster o f that town. Shephard testified that
he told Brow ne that he could not and would not vote for L orimer; that Brow ne ap
pealed to him, stating that “ we have not g ot enough without y o u ;” and that Mr.
Lorimer would make the prom ise he wanted. (P roceedings, p. 318.)
That he, H enry A. Shephard, said to Mr. Lorim er, “ If you will prom ise me that
neither Mr. Richards nor Mr. Becker shall be made postm aster I will vote for you.”
And that he, Mr. L orimer, said. “ I will prom ise you to do all in my pow er to
prevent them from being appointed.”
I am advised that the statutes o f Illinois provide that—
111
111
whoever corruptly * * * gives any money or other bribe, present, reward, promise, contract, obligation,
or security * * *
to any legislative, executive, or other officer, * * *
with intent to influence
his act, vote, * * * or judgment * * * on any matter * * * which may be then pending, or
may by law come or be brought before him, * * » shall be deemed guilty of bribery. (Sec. 31,
:hap. 3 8 .)
aCi
If it were m erely a matter o f counting votes, I think that H enry A Shephard’ s
vote should not be counted.
Besides these cases, it is my judgm ent that in view o f the testim ony o f White that
his right to participate in the “ jack p ot” was a consideration m oving him to vote for
Mr. Lorimer, and that White, Holstlaw, Link, Luke, and Beckemeyer, who voted for Mr.
Lorimer, appear to have received a pro rata part o f the “ jack pot,” and to have been
“ taken in” on the “ ja ck -p ot” conspiracy, the com m ittee would have been justified in
inquiring into the extent o f the “ jack p ot” and its relation, as an agency, in bringing
ibout the election o f Mr. L orimer.
There were 30 o f the Brow ne faction w ho follow ed B row ne’s leadership and sup
ported Mr. L orimer.
A lbert J. Hopkins had received 165,305 votes at the Republican prim ary; G eorge E.
Foss, 121, n o votes; W illiam E. Mason. 86,596 votes; W illiam G. W ebster, 17,704 votes.
Law rence B. Stringer was the only D em ocratic candidate and received the vote of
his party at the primary.
Mr. L orimer was not before the primary as a candidate. He received the vo-te of
only one m em ber in the legislature on May 13. 18, 19, 20, 25, but on M ay 26 he sud
denly received 108 votes. 5 or 6 in excess o f the o f the constitutional m ajority required.
E very D em ocratic legislator was under the instruction o f the D em ocratic primary
6
to support Mr. Stringer and knew it meant great political danger to s u ^ o r t Mr.
Lorimer. There was no mandate from the people to elect Mr. Eorim er. Every sound
reason o f political expediency forbade it. It seems as if pecuniary consideration alone
could accom plish it since this dangerous law -defying m ethod was finally resorted to,
and I think that the best evidence obtainable that it was necessary to buy votes in
order to elect Mr. Lorimer at all is the expert opinion o f those who bought these votes
and paid as high as $3,200 for a single vote, as in the H oltslaw case.
The above record o f bribery and corruption can not be broken down, in my
opinion, on the theory that the men w ho received the bribes were unw orthy o f belief
on their confession, and that their testim ony against the bribe givers is unw orthy of
credit (because the witnesses are in fam ou s); for the reason that there is such a tissue
o f substantial and circumstantial evidence surrounding the case that it is im possible to
resist the belief that these confessions are substantially true. It does not suffice
to say that a bribe taker is unw orthy o f credit. W ith the exception o f W hite, all the
testim ony from the bribe givers and bribe takers came with extrem e reluctance and was
obtained only by the exercise o f the pow ers o f the Governm ent.
In my judgm ent the attempt to rebut and break down the force o f these con fes
sions failed. It is extrem ely difficult to expose conspiracy where every man concerned
has a powerful interest to conceal his own wrongdoing.
L ee O ’ Neill Brow ne and his friend and Representative R. E. W ilson , \tfho w
as
indicted for perjury before the grand jury (p. 731), deny making the payments to
W hite, Beckem eyer, Link, and Luke, but they are overw helm ed by both the direct and
circumstantial evidence and in m y opinion are unw orthy o f credit (p. 732).
It has been suggested that Lee O’ Neill Browne has been vindicated, having been reelected
to the legislature.
In my judgment, this is no proof o f vindication, in the presence o f the evident bipartisan
system o f corruption in Illinois, where votes can be easily bought under a defective form o f
corrupt-practices act, which permits o f easy evasion. I f a man has behind him large capital
interested in his vindication, vindication is easy.
Particularly is this true in Illinois, where under the plumping system or accumulative
voting one-third o f the votes in Mr. Browne’s district would suffice to elect and where under
the bipartisan system he had both a Republican and Democratic following. In his evidence he
stated that he probably got nearly as many Republican votes as he did Democratic (p. 585).
The dangerous extent to which bribery o f voters has gone in this Nation is exhibited by
the indictment o f over a thousand citizens in Adams County, Ohio, a State in which there is
a defective corrupt-practices act and machine rule. The Republic can not last if such a
system is permitted to continue. The time has come for reform and the establishment of
honest government and o f the people’ s rule and the overthrow o f machine rule.
I again call attention to the code o f the people’s rule (S. Doc. 603, 61st Cong., 2d sess.),
which shows the easy pathway to righteousness in government.
ATTEMPTS TO BRIBE.
(11) George W . Meyers was one o f the seven members o f the Browne faction who
refused to vote for Mr. Lorimer. He made oath before the Senate committee that Lee
O’Neill Browne urged him to vote for Mr. Lorimer and suggested that there would be
some good State jobs to give away and plenty o f the “ ready necessary,” meaning money;
that he refused, however, to vote for Mr. Lorimer (p. 312).
J A C O B GROVES.
(12)
Jacob Groves, a Democratic member o f the house who did not vote for Mr.
Lorimer, testified that Douglass Patterson, an ex-member o f the house, came to him after
he had retired, on May 25, 1909, the night before Mr. Lorimer’s election, and requested an
interview, stating that he wanted him to keep quiet about the matter; he wanted to know if
Groves was an Odd Fellow or a Mason, and referring to the Lorimer matter, said: “ It may
be a good thing for both o f us if you, Groves, were to vote for Lorimer.” T o this pro
posal Groves replied “ that there was not money enough in Springfield to hire him to vote
for Lorimer.” The proposal excited Groves and he talked very loud, and Patterson urged
him “ to put down the transom,” and immediately denied that he intended any bribery
(P- 4 1 5 )-
HENRY TERRILL.
H enry Terrill, w ho was a Republican mem ber o f the house, testified that ( 13 ) John
Griffin, D em ocratic m em ber o f the Brow ne faction, w ho voted for L orimE , asked him
R
[Terrill] to vote for Mr. Lorimer. Terrill testified that he asked him “ what there
would be in it,” and he said “ $ 1 ,000, anyway.” Terrill says this occurrence took place
one or tw o nights before Mr. L orim er’s election (p. 498). Griffin denied the guilty
suggestion, but is less credible than Terrill, because Terrill had no reason to conceal
the truth or tell a falsehood, while Griffin did have. I think Griffin’ s vote should not
be counted. It should be rem em bered that 53 o f the votes for Mr. L orimer were
D em ocratic votes, instructed by the unanimous prim ary vote o f the D em ocrats of
Illinois to stand for Mr. Stringer. Th ey abandoned Mr. Stringer, the Dem ocrat, and
suddenly at a given m om ent solidly supported Mr. L orimer, the Republican. I do not
believe this conduct was the simple exercise o f honest personal judgm ent on the fitness
o f the candidates, and I think the mem bers o f the jack pot should have been ascertained
and examined. T h ey evidently were num erous enough to control or block legislation.
O f the 149 Republican m em bers voting, Mr. L orimer on ly received 55 , about a third,
show ing that as a candidate o f the Republican Party he was not acceptable to the
Republican mem bers o f the legislature, and, not having been a candidate at all in the
primaries, there was no popular mandate whatever to support his candidacy. Under
all the circumstances, 1 do not think he really represents the will o f the people of
Illinois. If the people o f Illinois want him, and will give him popular approval in the
primary, I think he m ight then be entitled to a seat in the Senate; otherwise not. He
should seek vindication in his ow n State.
Mr. President, under the circum stances I believe it m y duty to the people of
Oklahoma, to the Senate o f the United States, and to the A m erican people to m ove the
Senate to declare the so-called election o f Mr. L orim er void, on account o f the corrupt
practices above set forth, a resolution as to which I have already introduced.
I believe that there was wholesale corruption and bribery used in procuring the
election o f Mr. Lorim er, and that it has been abundantly proven, and that the effort to
break dow n the corroboratin g mass o f interwoven evidence above cited by rebuttal
has failed.
I believe if Mr. L o rim er should retain his seat under these painfui circumstances
it w ould low er the United States Senate in the esteem o f the Am erican people.
believe the. time has com e when the Am erican people will approve stern measures in
dealing with bribery and with corrupt conduct in public affairs, and I think it better
for all the people that there should be an end made to the election o f Senators by the
sinister com m ercial forces o f the Republic.
Mr. President, I submit to the Senate that the time has com e for the adoption ot
a constitutional am endment for the election o f Senators by the direct vote o f the
people, under the safeguard o f an honest and thoroughgoing corrupf-practices act and
publicity pamphlet such as O regon has adopted, which gives an equal chance to the
rich man and the p oor man, and strictly limits the use o f m oney in the election of
Senators.
In view o f the fact that many seats in the United States Senate are about to be
determined in various legislatures, it is o f the highest im portance that the Senate of
the United States should give the country to understand that the election o f Senators
shall be absolutely free from bribery or corrupt practice.
In m y opinion Mr. L o r im e r was not the choice o f the Legislature o f Illinois nor of
the people o f Illinois, and his election, so called, is entirely vitiated by the corrupt
practices o f his supporters, was illegal and void ab initio, and does not merit present
recognition.
It is no longer W illiam L orim er on trial but the Senate itself is on trial before
the bar o f the Am erican people.
I submit the follow in g resolution for the consideration o f the Senate:
1
,
ftesolved, That the so-called election of W IL L IA M LO R IM R R , on May 2 6 1909, by the Legis
lature of the State of Illinois, was illegal and- void, and that he is not entitled to a seat in the United
States Senate.
E X T R A C T OF R E M A R K S M A D E M A R C H 1, 1911.
Mr. O W E N . Mr. President, it is for the purpose o f having the influence o f the
Senate o f the United States thrown upon the right side o f this great contest between
8
the sinister, secret, crafty, m ost pow erfu l and trem endous com m ercial interests o f the
Republic and those dem anding integrity o f governm ent that I have th ou gh t fit to
express m y views in this case. It is not because I w ould be w illing to w ound the
feelings o f the sitting M em ber. If he w ere m erely a sinner, so are all men, and so
am I, and I w ould be glad to give him a friendly, b roth erly hand. A ll men make m is
takes.
I have made grievous ones, and grievously have I repented them.
When
men com m it w ron g, they do it in ignoran ce o f what is best for them selves. N o man
w ould w illingly do him self a con sciou s injury. A n y man w ho does w ron g does him
self a personal injury. T h is is not a question o f personalities. T h e question is, Shall
we by our vote on this case establish a p olicy o f govern m en t that w ill by exam ple and
precedent put an end- to bribery and corrupt practices or prom ote it? T h at is the
question, and that is the on ly question o f any great im portance in this case. It is true
that if the Senate decides erroneously in this matter it will impair its high standing
before the people o f the United States, and this I should deeply regret, but that is not
the m ost im portant question.
Mr. President, the C om m ittee lays dow n the doctrine, that if the sitting M em ber
has a m a jority o f the untainted votes he has a title in law w hich can not be disputed
either in law or in m orals. I want to exam ine w here that leads. Mr. L o r i m e r had
108 votes. Seven votes are practically con ced ed to have been corrupt.
T h at will
reduce his num ber to io i so-called untainted votes, n ot enough to elect. It required
102 votes to be a m ajority o f 202, w hich w ere present and v otin g in that legislative
assem bly. In order to enable a m a jority to be obtained, therefore, it is n ecessary to
argue that the m a jority o f the untainted votes w ill suffice; that is, that the 7 bribed
votes must not be counted as v otin g at all. T h is th eory w ould require 15 tainted votes
to have been proven to have been bribed to unseat Mr. L o r i m e r , and when you prove
15 votes to have been tainted, that argum ent w ould admit a larger num ber to be bribed
in order to seat the sitting M em ber; and when you prove a larger num ber, that again
will perm it still m ore to be tainted, and it w ould be im possible to unseat any M em ber
on such a basis until you exhausted the quorum .
L et me explain in a m om ent. Take the case o f Mr. H opkin s. Pie had 70 untainted
votes. Suppose som e bad friend o f Mr. H opkin s— suppose this indeterm inate, unknow n
thing called the L um ber Trust, for exam ple— had been so friendly w ith Mr. Idopkins
and so wanted to seat him that it had gon e into the open m arket and bou gh t 24 v otes
b elon gin g to Mr. Stringer and had bou gh t 39 v otes b elon g in g to Mr. L o r im e r , then Mr.
L orimer w ould have had left on ly 69 untainted votes, and Mr. H opkin s, with 70
untainted votes, his bad friends having bou ght in the open m arket 63 votes, w ould have
a title so pure and so stron g under the law that it could not be disputed either in law
or in morals.
W h at kind o f doctrine is that? That is the log ical consequ ence o f the doctrin e of
a m ajority o f the untainted votes being sufficient to establish a valid title. Is it g ood
p olicy ? I am sorry that the Senate, at the closin g m om ents o f this debate, does itself
the h onor to absent itself from this Cham ber. I wish there cou ld be a p h otogra ph o f
these vacant seats sent out to the A m erican people. I appeal against the prop osed
judgm ent o f the Senate as prophesied by the Senator from N ew H am pshire. [M r.
G allinger], w ho advised the Senate on this floor there w ere sufficient votes to seat Mr.
Lorimer. I am not speaking now to the Senate: I am speaking to the masters o f tKe
Senate,— to the people o f the United States, to the American people.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1 call
the attention o f the coun try to the rem arkable doctrin e o f the C om m ittee on
Privileges and E lection s— that a m a jority o f the untainted votes shall suffice. H ere
is an editorial from the N ew Y o rk E ven ing Post, from w hich I read the fo llo w in g :
If on February 22 , when Mr. Sheehan lacked 12 votes of an election in the New York legislature,
his friends had, without his knowledge or consent, bribed 23 of his opponents to vote for him or absent
themselves, would the people of New York have regarded this as a valid election in spite of clear proof
of the bribery? .
Under the rule laid dow n by the C om m ittee on Privileges and E lection s that w ould
have been g o o d law. That title o f Mr. Sheehan under such circum stances could not
be held invalid either in law or in m orals. I will not stultify m yself by g ivin g my
vote for such a doctrine. It is not on ly unreasonable; it is not on ly absurd; it is not
on ly preposterous, but it is im m oral, because it p rom otes im m orality, and I w ill have
none o f it.
•
Press of the Sudwarth Company, Washington.
New Mexico and Arizona
THE ISSUE:
Control of Government by Special Interests Versus Control of
Government by the People.
“ I shall not permit Arizona to be officially affronted and rebuked in the presence of
the American people because it has adopted the Initiative and Referendum and Recall in
its Constitution.”
SPEECH
OF
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
OF O K L A H O M A
IN THE
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
March 4, 1911
WASHINGTON
1911
P R E S S OF T H E
S U P W A R T H CP W ASH
SPEECH
OF
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN,
OF OKLAHOMA,
In
the
S enate
of
the
U n it e d
States,
Saturday, March 4, 1911.
The Senate having under consideration the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 295) approving the constitu
tion formed by the constitutional convention of the Territory of New Mexico—
Among other things, Mr. Owen said:
I favor the initiative and referendum because it has proven to be the most powerful
weapon for the overthrow of the organized selfishness which has been exploiting our great
Republic, and in so many States substantially nullified the chief purposes of our Government.
Through corrupt practices the public moneys, the public lands, the public properties, have
been invaded for private benefit. The Oregon system provides a thoroughgoing remedy for
this abuse. It has put the political boss and the political machine out of business; it has
ended private graft in public affairs; it has terminated corrupt practices, the buying of votes,
the coercing of votes, the hiring of voters for election day, hauling voters to the polls, solicit
ing voters on election day; it has abated blackmail, legislative incompetency, neglect or
treachery. It has made legislative and administrative officers responsive to the public will.
It has made speedy and satisfactory the .civil and criminal court procedure; it has estab
lished the rule of the people and enthroned the intelligence and conscience of the State in the
governing business.
I believe in the rule of the people, Mr. President, and the initiative and referendum has
been the most useful agency in bringing this about.
On May 5, 1910, the Hon. J onathan B ourne , Jr., of Oregon, delivered in the United
States Senate an address on ‘ ‘ Popular versus delegated government, and its effect on legis
lation. ” Over 2,700,000 of these speeches have been called for by the people. It explains
the simple, honest method by which the people govern that great State and no answer has been
made to the arguments presented by him, and, in my judgment, node can be made. He
showed absolutely that this method of government is conservative, sane, and safe; that the
people have not made a single mistake; that the petty and gross corruption prevalent in other
States has been substantially terminated by this system.
SUMMARY.
Mr. President, permit me to briefly., summarize the reasons which have impelled me to
hold the floor of the Senate for the last few hours in opposition to the admission of New
4
.vrexico and the exclusion of Arizona. I should have been willing to have them admitted
together, notwithstanding the egregious corporation-written constitution of New Mexico, in
which an educational qualification is not only prevented for the present, but made impossible
lor the future by the constitution itself.
I have refused acquiescence in the motion of my distinguished colleague from Texas [Mr.
B aii .e y ] that New Mexico should be summarily admitted, and Arizona denied, because when
we admit New Mexico we admit two stand-pat Republican Members of the Senate, two standpat Republican Members of the House of Representatives, and four stand-pat Republican
presidential electors for 1912, which may hazard the next presidential election.
When we deny Arizona we deny two progressive Democratic Senators, a Democratic
Member of the House of Representatives, and three progressive Democratic electors in the
presidential campaign of 1912. I can not, Mr. President, follow my distinguished colleague
in this proposal for these obvious reasons.
Nor do I think my honored colleague is justified in taking the lead in this matter for
the reason that he is violating the unbroken custom of the Senate in assuming a leadership
and taking charge of House Joint Resolution 295, admitting New Mexico, which comes from
the Committee on Territories, of which he is not a member. W ithin two days the leader of
the Republican Senators, the Senator from Maine [Mr. H a l e ] , and the chosen leader of the
Democratic Senators, the distinguished Senator from Mississippi [Mr. M o n e y ] , and the dis
tinguished Senator from Missouri [Mr. S t o n e ] severely rebuked a violation of this fixed prac
tice of the Senate on the open floor of the Senate.
The Democratic Senators trusted me with representing them on the Committee on
Territories, and I feel it my bounden duty to point out to the Senate that the proposal of
my distinguished colleague from Texas [Mr. B a i l e y ] would immediately result in very im
portant Republican partisan advantages and very important Democratic disadvantages.
And for these reasons, Mr. President, and because my distinguished colleague has no
commission to lead his party in this matter, and because he is leading in the wrong direction,
I have felt compelled to resist his efforts to admit New Mexico without the admission of
Arizona.
1
i
t
THE REAL ISSUE.
These partisan considerations, Mr. President, are not, however, the chief controlling mo
tive with me. The purposes I have in demanding the rights of Arizona are far more impor
tant than these. M y distinguished colleague is not willing to admit Arizona with the initia
tive, referendum, and recall, and I am not willing to permit Arizona to be denied and thusrebuked before the Nation on any such ground.
The initiative and referendum and recall, in my opinion, are devices by which the rule
of the people can be promoted and corrupt practices abated throughout the country.
The special interests have captured New Mexico and have written a so-called conservative
constitution, promotive of machine politics, so drawn that the special interests can easily
retain the control they have demonstrated they possess, while Arizona, with the initiative and
referendum and recall, is in the hands of the people of Arizona and will remain under the
government of the people through the initiative and referendum and recall.
The real issue in this contest between Arizona and New Mexico is whether we shall permit
a State controlled by the special interests to be admitted and deny the admission of a State
whose government is controlled by the people.
THE PRETEXT AGAINST ARIZONA.
I waive aside the petty pretext that the constitution of Arizona is not officially before
the Senate. A copy of this constitution, vouched for by the Secretary of the Interior, was
placed in the hands of the Committee on Territories of the United States Senate on January
31, 1911— over a month ago— was printed as a Senate document and made available for the
use of every Senator. The President and Secretary of the Interior Mr. Ballinger, can control
the functionaries of Arizona, from the governor down, and the original of this constitution,
properly vouched for, could have been here at any time since February 15, for the constitution
was ratified on February 9. It could have been placed before Congress just as easily as the
constitution of New Mexico. I do not approve this quibbling and trifling with the rights of a
great State, nor am I willing that the Senate of the United States should give its sanction to
petty political pettyfogging in denying a great State its right of admission.
L
5
ARIZONA SHALL NOT BE AFFRONTED.
Mr. President, I shall not permit Arizona to be officially affronted and rebuked in the
presence of the American people because it has adopted the initiative and referendum and
recall in its constitution. Seventy-six per cent of the people of Arizona voted in favor of
this constitution. They acted wisely; they acted conservatively; they acted sanely; they
acted -with more judgment, with more discretion, with more common sense than those who
antagonize these conservative measures by mere shallow epithet. I am amazed at those who
denounce the great and vital doctrine of the initiative and referendum as a “ populistic
theory” or as a vagary, when they have offered no reasonable argument against the sound
reasons which have been presented to ju stify the adoption of these necessary processes of
government.
THE
N E ED
FOR
D IR E C T
L E G IS L A T IO N .
The need for the initiative and referendum is imperative because the government of the
States, especially the government of the Eastern, Northern, and Western States, have been
slowly drifting toward a condition of corruption in both the legislative and administrative
branches.
The initiative and referendum is almost the only means available for putting a speedy end
to corruption in government, as I shall immediately show.
The great corporations of this country— the railway systems, the gigantic commercial
combinations, the so-called Protective Tariff League, and other commercial conspiracies—
having discovered the value of the governing business from a money standpoint, have not
hesitated to secretly engage in political activities in Nation, State, and municipalities. They
have controlled cities and towns for the purpose of making money out of street railways, tele
phone and telegraph companies, electric-light companies, water companies, municipal activities,
street paving, building sewerage systems, and so forth. They have undertaken the control of
larger municipalities, of cities from New York, Pittsburg, St. Louis, and Denver, to San
Francisco, and with what results?
The hideous exposures of crime, of graft, of municipal knavery, of vice, and the other
results of such government have become an appalling national calamity.
THE SHAME OF OUR CITIES.
1 beg you to look at the disclosures in San Francisco, for example, brought about by
Francis I. Heney and Rudolph Speckles. I invite your attention to the shocking criminal
conduct of the municipal management of the city of Denver,
set
forth by Ben
Lindsay
Beast and the Jungle.
.
,
. . ,
...
,
T
1 invite your consideration of the wholesale corruption and municipal graft of bt. Louis,
exposed during the determined campaign of the incorruptible and gallant and able Joseph W .
Folk, of Missouri.
, ,
,
..
.
,,
.,
,.
I call your attention to the bipartisan system of wholesale corruption in the city ot
Pittsburg, unearthed not by officers of the Government, but by the activities of private,
patriotic^ citizens, who would not endure any longer the unspeakable corruption of that won
derful municipality.
Do you recall that 116 men, members of the city council, leading bankers,
and prominent business men of Pittsburg were indicted at one time for wholesale thieving ol
public property under cover of law?
„ ,,
Has the Senate forgotten the graft disclosed m the construction and furnishing of the
capitol of Pennsylvania at Harrisburg?
.
,
Shall we close our eyes to the bipartisan system ot corruption exposed in Albany, the
capital of the greatest State in the Union?
Mr President, it has been only a few years since public sentiment demanded the cessa
tion o f ’ petty bribery of citizens by the railroads of this country through the issuance ot
hundreds of thousands of private passes.
^ A ,
,,
The infamous conduct of machine politics in buying votes has been illustrated recently in
Adams County Ohio, where nearly 2,000 citizens confessed to having sold their votes, and m
like manner in ’Danville, 111., similar disclosures-are now m progress.
in
6
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CORRUPT PRACTICES.
, T,h® significance of these disclosures is not in the frailty of humble citizens who have
been led to sell their votes._ The bribery was bipartisan, and common men saw "no hope of
good government under this system of bipartison purchase, and this may be account for
their bad conduct. The significance of these disclosures is this: That some great sinister
force, some mighty commercial power, with enormous wealth, has gone into the wholesale sys
tem of corrupting the citizens as well as the municipal officers, until graft is penetrating this
country from the highest to the lowest, from the gigantic captains of finance, who control the
power to expand the_ credits of the Nation or to contract the credits of the country and whoiiiake hundreds ol millions at one operation, down to the cooks in our households, who make
secret arrangements with the grocer and get their commissions, a petty graft in humble imi
tation of the larger grafter who deals on a giant scale. The time has come to end the
corruption and dishonesty of American life, and the initiative and referendum is the only
practicable means by which it can be speedily done.
" J
HOW TO END CORRUPT PRACTICES.
Mr. President, how shall we be able, in the States which require it, to pass a thorough
going corrupt-practices act which the scheming, corrupt politician and his corrupt commercial
allies can not evade? Can we pass it through a legislature whose members are the benefic
iaries of corrupt practices and who themselves are elected by bribery and by machine politics?
W ill they destroy the incubator out of which they themselves have been hatched?
W ill they pass an act which will terminate their own political preferment?
Mr. President, it is obviously impossible to pass a thorough-going corrupt-practices act
through a legislature elected by corrupt practices. The only available way, under such cir
cumstances, to obtain honest government is for the people to go over the head of a legislature
elected by such methods to the people themselves with the initiative and referendum. In this
way the people can directly initiate a thorough-going corrupt-practices act and an honest
election machinery by the initiative petition and bring it to a vote of all the people; and
when they do, the people never have failed, and they never will fail, to pass a properly
drawn act for the purpose of putting an end to corrupt practices.
O f equal practical importance is it that the corrupt politician dare not fight the initiative
and referendum openly, and when it is demanded, as in Illinois, where jack-pot legislation
flourishes, the people voted for it by over 4 to 1 in the last election.
T H E P E O P L E 'S
RU LE
C O N S E R V A T IV E , P R O T E C T IN G
PROPERTV.
In 64 proposals under the initiative and referendum in Oregon not a single one has
assailed private or corporate property. Even in England, recently, the Tories themselves
appealed to the people against the Eadical proposals of the representatives of the people in
Parliament by a referendum against the proposed tax laws.
It has been highly interesting to observe that on questions, of government the most
ignorant elements voluntarily eliminate themselves by not voting on statutes submitted by the
initiative and referendum. In the slum districts this is conspicuously the case. It might be
anticipated, because the more ignorant man does not feel competent to pass upon the wisdom
of a statute, nor does he feel a lively interest in such topics. He votes for the governor and
the Senator, but does not vote on the statute. It follows, therefore, that in actual practice
the exercise of the legislative powder by the people, under the initiative and referendum, is
exercised by the more intelligent classes of citizens, by the property-holding class, which
accounts for the conservative character of the statutes passed by the people under the initiative
and referendum.
The professors of the University of Oregon were found by actual inquiry to have voted
on 32 proposals identically with the vote of the people, except in one instance, where the pro
fessors voted in favor of woman’s suffrage and the people voted against it by a small majority.
Under these circumstances the voter, being a property holder and belonging to the more
intelligent class of citizens and being guided by his own proper and just self-interest, will vote
for his self-interest and therefore for the interest of the body of the people, uninfluenced by
any private graft or any unworthy motive. Such a vote, of necessity, must be “ stable, con
servative, safe and sane. ’ ’
tf
7
The self-interest of the people, Mr. President, will lead them along conservative, sensible
lines and protect them from mistake. This has been abundantly demonstrated in Oregon,
Oklahoma, Switzerland, and elsewhere. They are conservatively progressive. They can be
fully trusted, as so well explained by the Senator from Oregon [ J o n a t h a n B o u r n e ] in his
great speech of May ,
, in the Senate on the Oregon system of government. They will
only pass wise laws, and when these acts are passed by the initiative they can not be repealed
by the legislature nor made nugatory or ineffective by the legislature, because, with the refer
endum, the people can prevent such treachery on the part of a legislature.
It will not do to say, Mr. President, that you can promptly pass a thorough-going corruptpractices act without the initiative and referendum, because the history of the United States
offers an emphatic negative to this fallacious suggestion in so many o f the States. In the
Southern States of the Union, States made poor by the terrible war of
, controlled, as they
have been, by patriotic men, corruption has not made such serious inroads, although it is in
sufficient evidence to excite the apprehension of thoughtful men.
The Southern States apparently have not felt the need for the initiative and referendum
for this reason, and but little consideration appears, to have been given to it, although in two
years it will be an issue in every Southern State.
5 1910
1861
R E P R E S E N T A T IV E G O V E R N M E N T
MADE SURE.
I, of course, have frequently heard the thoughtless argument that the initiative and
referendum would do away with representative government and undermine the foundations of
the temple. The truth is that the initiative and referendum makes representative government
secure. It puts an end to the undermining of the foundations o f the temple by the thieves
that are undermining the temple by honeycombing these foundations with gross corruption,
bribery, and graft.
The initiative and referendum not only does not destroy representative government, it
makes representative government really representative.
It is representative government we want, Mr. President.
It is representative government we earnestly desire, Mr. President.
It is representative government that we are resolutely determined to have.
Mr. President, we will not be denied in this demand by sophistry or by evasion.
The initiative and referendum will compel the representatives in the legislature to write
the laws necessary for honest government under penalty o f having the laws written over the
heads of the representatives if they fail to perform their duty. The initiative enables the
people to make good any omission, as the referendum enables them to make good any sins
of commission; for, with the referendum, if the representative pass an act containing graft
or fraud, if the representative pass an act giving away a franchise of enormous value to a
corrupt corporation without consideration, the referendum can veto it and will veto it; but,
what is more important, the representative, knowing that his action can be vetoed, is prevented
by that fact from exposing himself to public condemnation. The corporation will not buy from
a man or legislature which can not deliver. It prevents the legislator from passing acts con
taining graft for fear of the people, and the representative, in like manner, is led to pass
the acts which the people desire because he knows that if he fails to do it the people will pass
the acts they want in spite of him by the initiative. It will, enforce a great cannon of the
L ord’s prayer. It will lead the representative not into temptation and will deliver him from
evil.
Therefore the representative is made truly a representative by this system, which makes
him responsive to the will of the people, which makes him write the laws the people want, and
prevents him writing laws the people do not want; and if he fails, then the people, by the
initiative, can write the laws they do want, and by the referendum they can veto the laws
they do not want— and in this simple, common-sense way the people can rule.
DIRECT LEGISLATION WILL END CORRUPT PRACTICES.
It is by this process that the people of the various States of the Union can establish
honest government in spite of the corrupt machine, and they can not do it in any other way.
■The corrupt machine is the agency through which corrupt special interests have obtained
control of government in the United States, and have gone into the governing business for
private profit.
1
I
8
The people of Arizona understand this perfectly well, and they are determined to protect
their government against the corrupt processes that have scandalized and now dominate so
many States of the Union, and which so strongly influence Congress itself. I could name many
of these States, Mr. President, if the invidious distinction of mentioning them by name should
not seem, perhaps, a stigma; but they are well known—certainly within their own borders—
and need no direct mention. It is true that some of the States have honest government and d*
not need the agency of the initiative and referendum for this purpose, but most of the States
do need it, and all of the States are going to have it for the reason that this method com
prises the most stable and conservative form of government. I f the corruption of government
could go on unabated and uncorrected, it would lead inevitably to a revolution, to an over
throw of property rights, and would render the Government unstable and the tenure of property
insecure, just as it did in Rome where it overthrew the greatest government the world had
known up to that time.
It would have overthrown Great Britain utterly, except that that wonderful race of
Anglo-Saxons discovered the danger to the stability of property and made haste to end cor
ruption by a thorough-going corrupt-practices act that is a model for the world, and which I
submit as an exhibit to my remarks—Exhibit C— and without objection will have it printed as
a Senate document.
I have been amazed to hear the Senator from Idaho refer to the initiative and referendum
as “ insane,” although it will be remembered that the honorable Senator denounced his own
legislature as insane on the question of voting favorably for submitting a constitutional
amendment for the election of Senators by the direct vote of the people.
I have been painfully surprised at the honored Senator from Texas [ M r . B a i l e y ] express
ing hostility to this doctrine of fundamental democracy, for the initiative and referendum is,
in concrete form, the embodiment of government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM IS S W E E P I N G T H E C O U N T R Y .
It will not do, Mr. President, merely to denounce this doctrine without investigation,
examination, or knowledge. Arizona is not alone in favoring this doctrine. She has distin
guished company— one of the greatest and the best of all the States in the Union has th«
initiative and referendum—the glorious State of Oklahoma. Oklahoma declared for this
doctrine before she was admitted to the Union, and was admitted to the Union with the
initiative and referendum in her constitution, President Roosevelt and his Cabinet holding it
was republican in form and duly entitled to admission, notwithstanding this provision.
Democratic Missouri also has adopted it, and so have the Democratic States of Arkansas, Col
orado, and Nevada. Are all these States insane? And are they so offensive, because of the
initiative and referendum, that the Senator from Texas would read hem out of the Union?
But Republican Montana, Oregon, South Dakota, Maine, Wyoming, and California have
adopted the initiative and referendum. Would the Senator from Idaho [Mr. H e y b u r n ] say
that these great Republican States are insane and unworthy to remain in the Union?
Mr. President, Illinois, conscious of the necessity of controlling the jack-pot legislation
system which had insinuated itself into the legislature of that noble and splendid Common
wealth, voted in favor of the initiative and referendum by a vote of over 4 to 1 at the recent
election. The Democratic Party of Ohio has declared for this doctrine. William Jennings
Bryan, the noblest Roman of them all, advocates it. Theodore Roosevelt—whose conservativa
and sound statesmanship I trust the Senator from Idaho [Mr. H e y b u r n ] will not dispute—
has approved the trial of this system by the States who care to try the plan. The governor of
Michigan, Hon. Chase S. Osborn, recommended it to the Michigan Legislature. The Demo
cratic candidate for governor of Minnesota made his canvass on this issue. Wisconsin will
undoubtedly write it immediately in her constitution.
Both parties in North Dakota are
committed to it. South Dakota has adopted it. Both parties in Nebraska declared for it.
Both parties in Kansas declared for it. Gov. Carey in Wyoming made his race upon it and
won, and the legislature has adopted it. Both parties in Idaho, I am informed, were com
mitted to it in previous platforms, although quiescent there now. M i l e s P o i n d e x t e r , in the
State of Washington, made his race upon it, and was nominated by over 30,000 plurality as a
Republican Senator.
In California both parties declared in favor of it, and Gov. Johnson, being more aggres
sively its champion, was elected on the slogan of the initiative and referendum and its
corollary, that “ the Southern Pacific had to go out of the governing business in California,”
and the legislature has adopted it by almost a unanimous vote. In Utah the people voted in
*
<>
9
favor of it 18 year ago, and the legislative machine has obstructed it. It will not do, Mr.
President, to say that all the people are insane or unsound or incapable of intellectual dis
crimination on this great question of public policy. Nowhere that this issue has been sub
mitted has it been defeated by the people. It means more power to the people, and the
people favor it.
The Senate of the United State can not refuse to admit Arizona on the ground that its
constitution contains the initiative and referendum without insulting over 20 States that are
fully committed to this doctrine, including Maine, Wisconsin, Montana, Illinois, California,
Oklahoma, Colorado, Wyoming, Nevada, Oregon, Missouri, Arkansas, Nebraska, Wisconsin,
South Dakota, and so forth, and even Massachusetts, for be it remembered, Mr. President,
that Gov. Eugene N. Eoss made his canvass on the initiative and referendum in Massachusetts
and was elected governor of that glorious Commonwealth by a great majority.
T H E R IG H T O F R E C A L L .
Oh, but it is said that the Arizona constitution gives the people the right of recall of
judges, and this is a dangerous innovation.
The constitution of Arizona does not particularly mention the judges as subject to recall,
but it does provide “ that every public officer in the State of Arizona holding elective office,
either by election or appointment, is subject to recall from such office by the qualified electors
of the electorial district from wh'ch candidates are elected to such office,” and this would
include judges.
When electors equal to 25 per cent of the number of votes cast at the last election
demand his recall, they nominate his successor, and an election by all the people can elect by a
majority rote his successor or reelect the officer whose recall is demanded.
Suppose it does apply to a judge. What of that? I f a judge on the bench becomes
corrupt, grossly inefficient, or outrageously tyrannical—and judges are men after all—why
should the people not recall them from public service? Is it not an easier method than
impeachment? Impeachment disgraces the officer forever. It puts an everlasting stigma upon
him, but under the system of recall it merely nominates and elects his successor, with the least
possible stigma on the official. It is a better and milder method than impeachment.
Mr. President, impeachment is merely the right of recall, limited in its nature to cases
where the conduct of the judge is so outrageous as to deserve eternal humiliation and disgrace.
The recall is a milder system. It operates benignly and removes judges and other officials
who prove inefficient, without attaching any stain or painful consequences. You might as
well contend that a corporation could not remove one of its officers. The annual election of a
governor in Massachusetts is due merely to the automatic recall of a short tenure of office
that expires annually.
The fact is, Mr. President, that the railroads and special interests of this country make
themselves extremely busy about appointing judges on the bench, and they will be found
unanimously opposed to the right or recall being exercised by the people, and every kind of
ingenious argument will be offered against the doctrine of recall.
The chief value of the recall is this: It serves as an admonition to the public functionary
that he is a public servant and not a public boss; that if he proves to be crooked, inefficient, or
tyrannical the people have a convenient way in the use of the recall of employing a public
servant who will be free from such vices, but the people never have really invoked it except
to remove a dishonest man.
Mr. President, over a hundred great municipalities in the last two yrars have adopted
the commission form of municipal' government, the chief features of which are the initiative
and referendum and recall. I respectfully call the attention of the honored Senator from
Texas to the fact that the city of Galveston and of Houston and of many other cities in his
State have adopted the recall, as well as the initiative and the referendum. Los Angeles has
only invoked the recall twice— once against a mayor who betrayed the interests of the people
and once against an alderman who violated his municipal pledge. One other instance occurred
in Seattle, where the mayor was recalled for compounding with vice in that city.
We need not be afraid of the recall in Arizona. No conscientious judge will ever be
recalled there, even if his opinion be not thought wise by the people. The people are very
conservative and very slow to anger. They are patient with their public servants when their
servants are faithful.
Mr. President, even granting, for argument sake, that the question of recall is a de
batable matter, nevertheless, Arizona should be.allowed the right to have its own way in the
matter «f its »wn organic law.
%
10
TH E
R E C A L L NO N O V E L T Y .
The recall is not a novelty. It appears in the constitution of Massachusetts of 1780 and
of to-day. The State of Massachusetts, moreover, elects its governor and other State officers
only for one year, recalling them at the end of a year by a short tenure of office without
reproach or reproof. I f they are quite satisfactory, they are reelected; if they are not quite
satisfactory, they are automatically recalled by the short tenure.
If a governor were guilty of high crimes, they might impeach, which would be a recall
in the form of a trial.
I can readily understand how an argumentative objection might be argued to the recall
of judges on the ground that it would interfere with the independence of the judiciary. But it
must be remembered that a judge on the bench, being only a human being after all, may,
under temptation, become corrupt, and corrupt in such a fashion that proof of his corruption
is impossible, so that impeachment is impossible, while the recall, nominating his successor,
is available.
Again, a judge upon the bench, being only a human being after all, might become grossly
intemperate, not sufficient to justify impeachment, but sufficient to justify recall.
Again, a judge upon the bench, being only a human being after all, might become utterly
tyrannical, overbearing, dictatorial, and offensive to the people over whom he has been trusted
to discharge this function; not sufficient, perhaps, to justify impeachment, but yet sufficient
to justify recall.
Moreover, a judge upon the bench interpreting the law may so interpret the law as to
become a lawmaker instead of a law interpreter; may exercise, under the color of judicial
power, legislative power. Not sufficient to justify impeachment, perhaps, but yet sufficient
to justify recall.
"
k
Moreover, judges on the bench, being merely human beings after all, are themselves con
trolled by their environment, by their professional education, by social, political, and business
influences. They may lead a judge to a point of view extremely injurious to the common
welfare. Not sufficient, perhaps, to justify impeachment, but yet sufficient to justify recall.
And, Mr. President, even Boston, the “ Hub of the Universe, ” around which revolves all
intellectual, moral, and ethical worth, two years ago adopted the doctrine of the recall in
relation to the mayor and members of the municipal council.
Ex-Senator Blair, of New Hampshire, advises me—
*
that the power of removal of the judiciary by address of the two houses of the legislature existed, and
perhaps still exists, in the State of New Hampshire, while the entire judiciary has been changed frequently
by act of the legislature whenever the public good seemed to require it, and the courts, since I can
remember, about four times.
On the other hand, the reasonable independence of the judiciary i3 a matter of importance,
but Arizona thinks it reasonable to retain power over all her public servants, even of judges.
It seems sufficient to say that the people of Arizona, having by a vote of 76 per cent'declared
in favor of trying this method for their own convenience and for their own self-government,
and being able under their constitution easily to change this rule if they find it expedient,
ought not to be denied the right of self-government because of this proposal which they have
seen fit to approve. It would not do to say that Arizona has been guilty of a grave departure
from the cannons of good government; that it has indulged in a radical, populistic theory in
this matter, because the adjacent Republican State of California has, through its legislature,
just adopted by an overwhelming vote the initiative and referendum and the recall, voting in
favor of the initiative and referendum by 35 to 1 against in the senate
and 75 to nonein
the house, and for the recall, in the senate by 36 in favor to 4 against. This is a Republican
State of great dignity, of great power, of great intellectual and moral worth. Oregon, like
wise, has adopted this by an overwhelming vote, and it is working excellently well. Let us
beware before we thoughtlessly condemn the great sovereign Commonwealths of the Nation
who have considered this matter, and let us not precipitously deny the value of the doctrine
of which we ourselves may be perhaps quite uninformed.
Ex-President Theodore Roosevelt is quoted as making the following statement in Chicago:
I saw it stated in the press that certain good people in Washington were against the admission of
Arizona as a State because it had adopted in its constitution the recall. In 1780 the State of Massachusetts
nut into its constitution precisely that provision for the recall. Now, understand me, I am not arguing
for or against the recall. I am merely showing that, if the people of
Arizona, or
any
other commun
wish to try it, nr if they do not wish to try it, it is their affair.
11
At all events Arizona should have the right of self-government; should have the right to
exercise the same right of self-government as California, as Oregon, and the other States in
the Union which have adopted the initiative and referendum and recall.
A R IZ O N A
SHALL
N O T BE O F F I C I A L L Y R E B U K E D F O R B E IN G
P R O G R E S S IV E .
Mr. President, it is maintained by those who would deny the admission of Arizona that
she is unworthy to be admitted because she has adopted the initiative and referendum and
Recall. I will not permit Arizona to be rebuked in the presence of the United States on this
issue. This issue is an overwhelming issue throughout the United States. If it had not been
for the control of the governing powers of the States and of the Nation by the corrupt sel
fishness of organized greed in preceding years, we would have long since accomplished many
happy results.
I f we had had the people’s rule, we would long since have corrected the gross abuses of
the tariff.
If we had had popular government, we would long since have controlled the extortion of
the trusts, which, by conspiracy, have been robbing the American people through the market
piace.
If we had had the initiative and referendum, we would long since have controlled the
transportation problem. We would long since have established a reasonable equality of
opportunity for the young men and young women of this country, and we would have long
since admitted Arizona and New Mexico.
But, Mr. President, what has all this to do with the admission of Arizona?
A R IZ O N A
HAS
THE
R IG H T
TO A D O P T H E R O W N
O R G A N IC
LAW .
Has not Arizona the right to write her own organic law if Arizona is to be admitted on an
equal footing with the other States, as required by the Constitution of the United States? If
Arizona should be forced to expunge the initiative and referendum and recall from her con
stitution and was then admitted, could she not write those provisions into her constitution
immediately afterwards'? Can you forestall it or prevent it? Or will you drive out of the
Union the States of Oregon, Montana, South Dakota. Maine, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Colorado,
California, Wyoming, and Nevada, who have already adopted this provision?
The question answers itself.
The truth is self-evident. The initiative and referendum and the recall are’ not contrary
to the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution of the United States was adopted
by a practical referendum of delegates pledged by the people.
And the recall of the President of the United States is provided by impeachment pro
ceedings, and the principle of recall by impeachment is recognized in the Constitution of the
United States and of every State in the Union, as well as in the hundred municipalities who
have recently directly adopted it.
Mr. President, I give notice to the Members of this Senate, and, to public men wherever
they are, that if they dare to openly oppose the initiative and referendum they will be held
to strict account by the people of the United States, who are determined to overthrow the
political activities of the commercial oligarchy that has been controlling and corrupting this
country.
The people of Arizona have adopted a constitution which is intended to restore to the
people of that State all of the powers of government and to put it out of the power of
special interests ito invade or control the governing function of Arizona. Neither this Con
gress nor the President of the United States will be able to prevent Arizona adopting this
organic law and entering the Union with this constitution.
THE
P R O G R E S S IV E V S . T H E
R E T R O G R E S S IV E .
The progressive movement in the United States, Mr. President, is not confined t® parties.
The progressive Republicans believe in the initiative and referendum, the recall, and a
thoroughgoing corrupt-practices act. They believe in the sovereignty of the people. They
believe in the Oregon system of government. Of all the acts proposed by initiative petition
in Oregon or passed on by referendum—64 in number— not a single one has proposed to attack
either private or corporate property. The progressive Republicans believe in the people ’s-rule
system of government, and the national platform of the Democratic Party at Denver declared
the people’s rule the overwhelming issue, to which all other issues were subordinate.
12
rea?°ns> Mr- President, and because this is the great issue before the American
peopie whether the control of government shall be by the special interests or whether the
Z hZ i t 7 0V°ra™ nt 3 h a 1 1 be by the p eop le- I haJe determined C t the Lnate of the
b W 'd St te- s, oald n ?£ be put m the attitude of deciding against Arizona unless it decided
S h
<
l£n 7 nT ? g? T r NeZ TMe™ °-. 1 greatly desire the admission of them both, because as a
Democrat, I believe New Mexico has a right to write her constitution as she pleases ’within
A iiI<ShiS°SheM T O right
THE
V IC IO IS
'aW a ° d ‘ 'le princiP,es of ° 'lr Government, and ['believe
FEATURES
OF
THE
NEW
M E X IC O
C O N S T IT U T IO N .
Mr. President, the constitution of New Mexico, submitted to the State, has been so drawn
as to enthrone the corporations m that State, and I can not believe it is accidental I do
^ S
StaTe9
intentlon to 3 0 draw that constitution as to give the corporations'control
EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATION PREVENTED.
First, article 7, on elective
grossly ignorant vote and makes
provision (art. 7, sec 3) that “
?L d or write3.1’ " 6 9 ^
**
franchises, thoroughly safeguards the perpetuation of flip
it impossible to impose anEducational S lffic a d o n by Ee
the right of any citizen of this State to vote hold office
restncted’ abridged, or impaired on account of inability to
recte?hr 0tLor w r' P™*ident’ j 4 Provides that this low standard of electorate shall not be corv
in an
'*1 6 ?■ *he people of that State “ except upon a vote of the people of this State
L t t
!u /
at C st three-fourths of the electors voting in the whole State, and at
a
ieast two-thH-ds of those voting in each county of the State, shall vote for such amendment.”
n l S o U sinSle+,C Unty having over one-third of an ignorant vote can veto an intelligence
0+
qualification on the franchise. And this is so important to the corporations that propose to
a h J ll^ l v ln'or S i t + v T aVe-made a furtber Provision (art. 19, sec. 1) that no amendment
shall apply to or affect the provisions of section-3, article 7, on the elective franchise, “ unless
^ be proposed by a vote of three- fourths of the members elected to each house ”
Moreover, under article 11, on corporations, it is provided that the corporation com
mission may disregard the reasonable safeguards controlling the action of the commission “ bv
charging such rates as the commission may describe as just and equitable” in cases of general
epidemics, pestilence, and calamitous fatalities “ and other exigencies” —“ other exigencies”
being broad enough to cover any ingenious argument the corporations might assert.
I M P O S S IB L E
TO
AM END.
And m order to retain this control through an ignorant electorate, a purchaseable vote
subject to the purchase of the corporations and their agents, article 19 has practical^ made it
impossible for the intelligent citizenship of this State to amend this constitution except under
the most extraordinary and well-nigh impossible conditions. Article 19, section 1 , provides:
.
amendment can only be proposed at a regular session, and if two-thirds of each
of the two houses, voting separately, shall vote in favor thereof,
it mav be entered on
h«?d i T ™ L 0T anv ame.n? ment
^
proposed at the first regular session of the legislature
held after the expiration of two years from the time the constitution goes into effect or at the recu Hr
e W e d °J theu lef !L atu,re c" nvenme each eighth year thereafter, and if a majority of all the members
n, eaCi
h
the# t*T° houses, voting separately, shall favor it, the secretarv of state mav submit the
same to the electors of the State for their approval or rejection. If the same be ratified bv a majority of
the electors voting thereon by an affirmative vote equal to forty per centum of all the votes cast3 at 'sa:d
election in the State and in at least one-half of the counties thereof, then and not otherwise, such amend
ment or amendments shall become part of this constitution.
’
In other words, even under these difficult conditions, a majority of the people of the
State will not control it if one-half of the counties be not also carried in favor and if the
affirmative vote be not also equal to 40 per cent of all the votes cast at the said election it
being well known that thousands of voters who vote for officials do not vote on constitutional
amendments, being ignorant of the meaning of such amendments. In other words it gives
the corporations the benefit of the ignorant or unintelligent vote.
13
r
[
***
But there follow still other safeguards for this corporation-written document, to wit, that
ao more than three amendments shall be submitted at one election, and this would always
Permit unimportant amendments to be thrust in front of an important amendment and thus
prevent important reforms.
But this is not all. The franchise provision preventing any intelligence qualification can
n«t be amended even under these difiicult conditions unless it be first proposed by a vote of
three-fourths of all the members elected to each house.
And, Mr. President, the corporations have not been content with this. In section 2 they
have taken great pains to prevent a constitutional convention being called by the provision
that during 25 years after the adoption of this constitution a three-fourths vote of the mem
bers of the legislature or after the expiration of 25 years a two-thirds vote of the members
thereof, shall be required to make a call for such a convention. And then the call must be
confirmed by a majority of all the electors of the State, and, in addition, of a majority of all
the electors in at least one-half of the counties of the State.
And this is the constitution which the stand-pat Republicans would rush through, while
they would deny admission to Arizona, with its constitution so framed that the people of the
&tate can easily amend it in case they find it inexpedient or unwise for any reason.
The issue is between government by corporations and by special interests and government
by the people. Listen to the terms of the Arizona constitution. Article 21, section 1, pro
vides that any amendment may be proposed in either house of the legislature or by initiative
petition of 15 per cent of the voters, whereupon, either upon such petition or by a majority
vote of the two houses, the proposal is submitted to the qualified electors with appropriate
publicity provided, and a majority of the electors can immediately amend their constitution
in this manner. Here is a government of men, by men, and for men, who are not tied up by
crafty artifices under constitutional forms so as to make self-government well-nigh impossible.
it is not a new subject, Mr. President. It is an old contest, a contest between greed and
avarice, on the one side, and human rights on the other side. It is the contest between
progress and retrogression.
C O R R U P T IO N P R O M O T E D B Y D E N IA L O F S E C R E T B A L L O T .
t+-
Mr. President, I call your attention also to the fact that section 8 , article 2, provides that
‘ ‘ all elections shall be free and OPEN, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time
interfere to prevent the right of suffrage.”
This constitutional joker “ open,” so unostentatiously placed in the bill of rights, would
be interpreted in a corporation-controlled State as a denial of the secret ballot, of the Austra
lian ballot, and when so interpreted by a corporation-elected court, it would be impossible to
correct this evil by a constitutional amendment, because the constitution can not be amended.
The Australian ballot, Mr. President, has been found absolutely essential to honest gov
ernment, absolutely essential to prevent the intimidation of the voter.
This constitution, so drawn as to make the Australian ballot impossible, i3 drawn in the
interest of fraud, of graft, of corruption, and ought not to be endured. The constitution of
New Mexico as it has been written does not deserve to be received or approved, because it
obviously is controlled by the sinister commercial influences who propose to dominate that
State in defiance of justice and equity. In my judgment, New Mexico ought to be speedily
admitted, but she ought to be required to so frame her organic law that the people of that
State can have a secret ballot and can amend the constitution in case it be found defective, so
that they can have self-government in fact and not self-government merely in form; so that
they can have a republican form of government, which is republican in its essence as well as
in form; so that they shall have government in fact of the people, by the people, and for
the people.
^
C O N S T IT U T IO N
Rp
NOT
R A T IF IE D
BY
H ON EST
VOTE.
I call your attention, Mr. President, to the fact that the Hon. Henry W. Blair presented
evidence before the committee of the House of Representatives and also before the Senate
committee, alleging that this election was obtained by fraud and was not fairly representa
tive of the will of the people of New Mexico, and in effect, he, on behalf of the citizens of
New Mexico, has been demanding an investigation of this very matter. They deny that this
constitution has been ratified by the vote of the people of New Mexico and demand a congres
sional inquiry, and it is in the presence of this evidence and these recorded, printed facts
14
before the two Committees on Territories that this bill is rushed forward at 1 o ’clock m the
morning of the last calendar day of the Sixty-first Congress when it is impossible for Senators
to examine this record or be apprised of the facts.
It is denied that there is any constitution from New Mexico here at all, what purports to
be such being vitiated by fraud, and those who make this charge demand a hearing, and naght
not to be denied.
The difference between the constitutions of New Mexico and Arizona can no longer be
described as the difference between Republican and Democrat. Tne difference is between the
reactionary and retrogressive and the progressive. It is the difference between the Tory and
the Liberal, as I understand it. The difference between the progressive and the retrogressive.
At all events, it is the difference between a constitution drawn to promote corporate power and
greed, and a constitution drawn to promote the rights of men, of human liberty, and of human
happiness.
I would have admitted New Mexico 30 years ago if I could have controlled the matter,
and I desire the admission of New Mexico now, but I do not appreciate the demand for the
admission of New Mexico, with two Republican Senators, and the denial of Arizona, with two
Democratic Senators.
I do not think this is fair to the Democratic Party, separate and apart from the rights of
Arizona and New Mexico. The Democratic Party has a great work to perform, for it is about
to come into the control of the Government of the United States, and for one, Mr. President, 1
wish to say that when the Democracy does come into power I expect it to pursue a course
so moderate and wise and just, both to the people and to the great commercial enterprises of
the country, that it will commend itself to all of the forces of the Republic who believe in
honest and faithful and efficient government. We need the two votes of Arizona in the
Senate, and until they are admitted I shall not willingly agree to admit New Mexico, nor in any
contingency shall I be content until New Mexico has amended her constitution, to permit her
own people to amend that constitution easily.
Mr. President, some of my excellent colleagues, for whom I have the greatest possible
respect, have not believed in the initiative and referendum and have not seen any need or
occasion for it. With them I sympathize, because I did not see any need for the initiative and
referendum until within recent years, nor until after giving a careful and thorough study to
the evils from which our country was suffering and the possible remedies. I had not seen or
realized the importance of the initiative and referendum as an instrumentality for restoring the
sovereignty of the people and establishing the people’s rule. The real issue is to establish
the people’s rule against the corrupt rule of the special interests The initiative and refer
endum is an agency of great efficiency in bringing this about. In a State where the people
do actually rule as a matter of fact and not merely as a matter of theory the urgent importance
of the initiative and referendum is not so obvious, although, if I had time and occassion, it
would be easy to demonstrate the wisdom of this governmental device on any grounds. First,
that it will enable the people to raise special issues and settle them one by one without the
confusion of many issues embraced in one party platform and confusedly antagonized in
another party platform. It would enable the people with authority to make good any error of
omission or commissin by a legislature whose integrity was above dispute and beyond doubt.
The underlying reason which justifies the initiative and referendum, even in States that are
honest, is that all of the people know more than some of the people, and outside of the legis
lature will be found men of splendid abilities to initiate important improvements of govern
ment, men who are superior in intellectual power to members who happen to run for position
in legislative assemblies.
The time will come, as it ought to come, when the people, by a short ballot, will place the
legislative power of the State in the hands of a smaller number of expert legislators, and we
will have an abatement of cumbersome legislatures of immature legislators who pass thousands
T
of ill-digested bills until the State statutes, and our national statutes as well, have grown to
be of such mammoth size and complexity that no citizen can know what the laws are he is
expected to observe.
The initiative and referendum is not a national issue, but it is a State issue in a large
number of States, having a national aspect, because of its relation to the termination of cor
ruption and its relation to the character of representatives who appear in Congress and in the
Senate. It has this relation—that it will prevent the representatives of special interests com
ing into the House of Representatives or the Senate, because the special interests can not
control the States where the States have the initiative and referendum.
e
15
^
’
3
)
t
J
1
AD D ITIO N A L
,
I
)
,
A number of States do send thoroughly trustworthy representatives to the Senate and to
the House without the initiative and referendum, and long may they continue to d« so,
although they will safeguard their future if they speedily adopt this great doctrine, which
makes assurance doubly sure of the integrity of government and its freedom from corruption.
t: “
A D V A N TA G E S
OF
IN IT IA T IV E
AND
REFERENDUM .
Important additional advantages of the initiative and referendum are:
First. That it raises the level of intelligence of the electors who, being charged with
the duty of direct legislation, direct nomination, and direct power in the governing business,
consider these questions personally as a part of the duty of citizenship; and,
Second. It is of great value to the representative of the people in the legislature, f®r the
■ound reason that he is stimulated to more intelligent, conscientious performance of duty.
A third and highly gratifying result of this system is that tli ■ representative is no longer
>
under suspicion of being influenced by special interests, because his act is subject to review
by the people, and he acts as a representative subject to the approval of his master—the
people— and no man has a right to impugn his integrity or his wisdom when his action is not
criticised in the open by the referendum petition demanding a veto on his conduct. It thus
promotes the confidence of the people in the integrity of their Government, stimulates lev® of
country, and promotes the patriotism of the people.
REASON S
FOR
NOT
Y IE L D IN G .
Mr. President, I have been keenly sensible of the demands made upon me by the leaders
of the Senate on both sides, Republicans and Democrats, and especially by my colleagues, that
I should yield the floor and give up this contest. I have been unwilling to do so, because I
regard the issue of the Arizona constitution as of fundamental and vital importance to the
people of the United States. I regard it my duty to the people of this Republic to emphasize
the importance of this doctrine as a means for the speedy termination of corrupt practices in
this Republic and for the restoration of the integrity of government as it was established by
our fathers, and while I may feel comparatively alone on the floor of the Senate in this deter
mined purpose, having the earnest support, however, of my noble colleague from Oklahoma
[Mr. Gore], I wish to say in extenuation of my conduct that I do it because I feel honor
bound as a soldier of the common good to stand faithfully and fiimly, in spite of all opposi
tion, in support of what I believe to be essential to the integrity and welfare of our glorious
Republic and on behalf of the sweating, toiling millions, who are my kinsmen, who produce all
the wealth and enjoy too small a part of the wealth they create under the corrupt government
of THU SYSTEM.
Mr. President, I am reminded at this critical moment of the sentiment ®f Abwtham
Lincoln ,
I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true.
I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live up to what light I have.
I must stand with anybody that stands right; stand with him while he is right and part with him
* hen he goes wrong.
The inarticulate mass of men who humbly toil and patiently labor are entitled to enjoy in
peace the proceeds of their labor—to have reasonable hours, food, shelter leisure—and or
ganized greed must stay its sordid hand. The issue is on. The People’s Rule v. the Rule of
the System.
Mr. President, if I were able to secure an expression of the Senate on this matter I am
convinced that my Democratic associates and the splendid band of progressive Republicans
would almost unanimously support the admission of Arizona and New Mexico, and I am
equally sure that the reactionary elements of the Republican Party would be found on the other
side. At all events, I do not intend to yield until I have been afforded an opportunity to get
a vote of the Senate upon the admission jointly of Arizona and New Mexico.
i>
•e
INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM
In Its Relations to the Political and Physical Health
of the Nation.
ADDRESS
OF
HON. ROBERT L.OWEN
UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA.
Under the auspices of the Society for Ethical Culture,
at Carnegie Hall, March 20, 1910.
PRINTED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
OF MARCH 14, 1911.
WASHINGTON
An Address by R O BE R T L. O W E N , United States
Senator from Oklahoma, under the auspices of the
Society for Ethical Culture, at Carnegie Hall,
March 20, 1910, on the
IN
ITIATIVE AND R F R N U
EEEDM
In Its Relations to the Political and Physical
H ealth of the Nation.
A nation is in a condition o f good political health when its representatives
are the free choice o f the people and represent the best ideals o f the people in
the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Departments o f the Government.
When these officials are nominated by corrupt machine methods, are con
trolled by selfish interests, by mere self-preferment, by bribery, or by other
sinister influence, the political health o f that nation is bad, and in need o f
curative process.
Such Government needs restoration to a condition o f sound political health
where every official shall be responsive to the best ideals o f the people.
Where it has free expression the majority o f the people will always stand for
the principles o f righteousness; for honest and economic government; for the
control of. sordid ambition and avarice; for the abatement o f commercial
piracy, and for the control o f conspiracies in restraint o f trade, and for the
higher ideals o f the enlightened conscience, and for a more equitable distribution
o f the proceeds o f human labor than is possible under a government corrupted
and controlled by machine methods.
The political health o f the Nation is distinctly bad in many o f the States
where corrupt machine politics operating as an agent o f selfish interests, both
political and commercial, has obtained control o f party government, nominating
machine men committed to selfish interests at the precinct, in county conventions
and in State conventions, nominating officials from constable to governor by
machine methods.
The people appear to rule through party machinery, but do not rule in fact,
because the party machinery is in the hands o f corrupt machine men, controlled
in the interest o f the few and against the interest o f the many. The remedy
is to restore popular government and to overthrow machine government, and the
Initiative and Referendum is the open door by which this can be done, by which
it has been gloriously done in Oregon.
Machine control o f party government, among other evil results, makes
impossible the passage o f laws needed for the protection o f the physical health
o f the Nation, notwithstanding the urgent demand o f the people expressed
3
4*
through medical and sanitary associations from the Atlantic to the Pacific for
twenty years.
.
The physical health o f the Nation depends upon the prevention o f epidemics,
upon purity o f water supply, upon clean air, pure foods, sanitary conditions,
reasonable hours o f labor, protection o f children and infancy from exposure.
The people o f the United States lose 600,000 people annually from preventable
causes. These lives could be saved by good laws; they are lost because o f bad
laws. In a letter o f Charles A. L. Reed, Chairman o f the Legislative Committee
o f the American Medical Association o f March 10th— ten days ago he said
to m e:
“ Suppose our entire native Army and Navy were swept off o f the earth, not
once, but three times in a year. W ould the Congress do anything about it? There
are nearly five millions needlessly ill every year. Suppose that every man, woman
and child in all New York, with Boston and Washington added, were similarly
stricken, would the Congress inaugurate an inquiry? Our losses from these
causes amount to a billion and a half dollars every year.”
“ Our health agencies are uncorrelated and unorganized. Suppose that our
monetary system were looked after by a dozen or more bureaus in almost as
many departments and that it were responsible for a billion and a half dollars
loss every year, would Congress be disposed to think that there was possible
relationship between the lack o f organization and the deficit?”
The fact is the United States Government has no organized Department of
Public Health, no proper publicity o f matters affecting the public health, no
proper co-operation with the States.
The annual mortality in the United States is sixteen and five-tenths per
thousand, in New Zealand, with no better climate, it is between nine and ten to
the thousand, a loss o f nearly seven human beings to the thousand for the
United States in excess o f New Zealand, where they have controlled monopoly
and established proper sanitary safeguard. Seven persons to the thousand means
in ninety millions o f people an annual loss o f six hundred and thirty thousand
people, whose lives might be saved by proper conduct o f Government.
What is the trouble? Have the people never requested any improvement in
this respect? O, yes, through all the great societies relating to the health o f the
people petitions and prayers, and demands, have gone up to Congress and have
remained unheeded, unobserved, uncared for, because the members o f the House
and Senate are three degrees removed from the people under the convention
machinery o f party-government. This is not true as to all members, but it is
true as to the majority. Observe how a precinct delegate is sent by a machine
boss on an obscure call, at an unsuitable place packed with his partisans to the
county convention, how a county convention o f machine delegates from the pre
cinct nominates a machine candidate for the legislature, where the legislature o f
machine men elects a machine man for the United States Senate. Under the
pretext o f a necessity for organization, this method has developed. A t first, it
worked well, but becoming perverted and corrupted it now works injuriously
as an agency o f selfish interests. The people are beginning to correct these
evils o f government in various States o f the Union by various processes such as
demanding the right o f direct nomination o f candidates through the direct
primary, by insisting on publicity o f campaign contributions, by forbidding
excessive campaign contributions, by demanding the Initiative and Referendum,
restoring to the people the right to make their own laws and the right to vet®
acts o f legislature not approved by the people.
From the days o f Jefferson as President, the right o f the people to instruct
their representatives was freely recognized, but gradually the growth o f party
nominations by the delegate system took the power out o f the hands o f the
people and put it in the hands o f machine men who made a profession o f politics
r
4
until finally the rule o f the people was taken away from them ; until the extreme
condition o f machine rule o f party Government has been d&eloped in the United
States against which there is now going on a universal protest. The questioning
o f candidates, the direct primary, publicity o f campaign contributions, the
Initiative and Referendum, the advisory initiative are being agitated throughout
the United States.
The foundation stone o f the control o f Government by the people will be
found in the Initiative and Referendum.
I wish to point out to you the relation between the Initiative and Referen
dum and the political and physical health o f the Nation.
Ben Lindsay, o f Denver, a man o f great ability, o f great patriotism, and o f
intense activity in the cause o f civic righteousness, has recently, in Everybody's
Magazine, painted a most instructive picture in detail o f the triumphant corrup
tion and control o f the legislative, executive, and judicial authority o f the State
o f Colorado by corporate rascality. In discussing a remedy he said, in effect:
It is useless to talk about controlling the trusts by Government so long as the
Government itself is controlled by the trusts.
The political health o f the Nation and the physical health o f the Nation
can not be raised to its highest efficiency until the people o f the Nation and o f
each State in reality and in sober truth actually control their own Government.
So long as machine politicians make the nominations for both parties, patriotic
citizens register their votes for such nominees in vain. They have only a choice
o f evils. The doctrine o f Boss Tweed in New York might be expressed in these
words, “ let me select the candidates, I care not who elects.” Selection is more
vital than election.
When the insurance companies and the gigantic corporations raise millions
o f money to corruptly influence the elections; when they use the huge strength
o f financial authority with its far-reaching power to effect votes in an intensely
commercial Nation, you may expect while machine methods prevail that the
nominations in both parties, will be favorable to the selfish commercial interests
and that such interests will exercise corrupt and sinister influence over those chosen
to administer government in the legislative, executive and judicial branches o f
the Government.
In vain the people demand election o f Senators by direct v o te : in vain do
the people clamor for an abatement o f one man power in the House o f Repre
sentatives ; in vain do they seek publicity o f campaign contributions; in vain
do they demand laws forbidding corrupt practices and other reforms o f govern
ment. In vain do they demand control o f monopoly, reduction o f tariff, and
lower prices. The people are appealing to the nominees o f machine politics
committed against them. These nominees are too often political mercenaries
playing politics for profit. You can never control commercial conspiracy or
ambition by your Government until you have taken your Government out o f the
hands o f commercial conspiracy and out o f the hands o f purely selfish political
ambition.
And how will you do this ?
Bv the Initiative and Referendum.
Has it ever been done? Without the shadow o f a doubt; it has been done;
it has been excellently well done. Is it difficult to do this? N o ; it is easy to be
done. It only requires that you, the people, shall understand^ how to do it and have
your interest in regaining control o f your government maintained with sufficient
persistence to change each State constitution that stands in the way. Oregon,
Montana, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Maine have already acted
and established the Initiative and Referendum. Many other States are actively
considering it. Many o f the State constitutions have been intentionally made
difficult to change bv'those who. under the plea o f conservatism, believe it should
5
be made difficult for the will o f the people to register itself in constitutional
forms, for fear, forsooth, the people might on impulse misgovern themselves by
passing bad laws.
For fear that some o f this great audience may not be familiar with the
improved methods o f making effective Lincoln’s great idea o f “ A Government
o f the people by the people, for the people,” I wish to explain more clearly the
Initiative and Referendum, the Mandatory Primary, the Corrupt Practices Act.
The Initiative means that a small percentage o f the voters, usually 8 per
cent, can initiate any law they please, and require it to be submitted at ihe next
regular election for a vote o f the people o f the whole State for their acceptance
or rejection. It is sometimes provided that the legislature may submit a com
peting measure with, the measure proposed by initiative petition.
By the initiative, the people o f N ew .York State might initiate a mandatory,
direct primary law, a corrupt practices act, and compel a vote in spite o f the
failure o f a legislature to pass such a law as the people wanted.
It has been said o f the Pennsylvania legislature that in a former time a
member o f the House arose and said: “ I move, if Tom Scott have no further
use for the legislature, that it do now adjourn.”
A mandatory direct primary puts in the hands o f the members o f each party
the direct power to nominate their own candidates. The power o f selection is
more important than the power o f election. The people elect in vain if corporate
power by machine manipulation nominates the candidates in each party or by
control o f machinery of government can stuff the ballot-box.
The nomination o f machine men is absurdly easy. It is done by the con
vention system. A State convention is called to nominate a Democratic or
Republican candidate for Governor, the State Chairman issues the call announcing
that each county is entitled to so many delegates; the county delegates to be
elected by a county convention; the county convention to be composed o f dele
gates selected at the precinct; the precinct has a machine man or two who
controls the local patronage, and has some local advantages— he is the precinct
boss; he calls a precinct meeting on short notice, obscure advertisement at an
inconvenient place, perhaps a small room over a saloon, packs the meeting with
his own henchmen, has a cut and dried program. The meeting immediately
nominates a candidate, or candidates to the county convention, their names
selected in advance. The candidates are elected immediately, viva voce, and
the first step has. been taken. The county convention composed o f such machine
delegates, send machine-men chosen in advance or men at all events acceptable
to the machine, and the machine delegates to the State convention are thus
elected. When the State convention meets, composed o f such machine-chosen
delegates, what can you expect? Did the people select the precinct delegates?
No, certainly not! 'D id the people select the county delegates? No, certainly
not! Did the people select the State delegates? No, certainly not! The people
did not select the Governor! They only elected the choice o f a corrupt machine.
It is enough to make a patriot weep who understands it thoroughly.
It sometimes happens that even the machine men are compelled, in order
to abate suspicion, and to elect the State ticket to nominate a man absolutely
above suspicion, but if they do, you can depend upon it that his power for public
service is sufficiently handicapped by his environment that he can not accomplish
much substantial constructive service. It has been interesting to observe Gov
ernor Hughes o f New York trying to establish one o f the ten Commandments,
a Direct Primary, in vain. Has not this audience intelligence enough to know
why? It is because the right o f the people to directly nominate, by a direct
primary, the right o f the people to select, means the people’s rule and the over
throw o f one o f the agencies o f organized commercialism, and o f organized political
6
ambition. The machine politicians fatten on the public treasury, on official
favoritism, on State franchises, on municipal contracts.
W e do not need the present exposures at Albany as evidence o f what it
means. Everybody knows who is not imbecile.
W e do not need Tom Platt’s alleged contribution o f $300,000 to the Harrison
campaign as evidence, nor did we need the exposures o f the insurance companies
by Governor Hughes to tell us what this grossly corrupt system means. W e all
know.
There is no intelligent man in the country who does not know enough o f the
evils o f machine politics to agree that the time has come in the United States for
the correction o f these evils in both parties and to restore to the people o f this
country the right to directly nominate their own politicaj servants by direct
primary, the right to initiate their own laws by the initiative petition and the
right o f veto o f any act o f their servants in the legislature by the Referendum.
The Referendum provides that when the legisalture passes an act not accept
able to the people o f the State, a petition within ninety days after the passage
o f the Act, signed by five per cent o f the voters, will operate to suspend the law
until the next regular election, at which the people will vote upon the law whether
it shall become a Statute or whether it shall not. Is it possible that any man o f
sound mind and good character will say that a hundred men in the legislature
shall pass an act and make it effective over the people o f the State against
the direct vote o f a million men! The right o f the people to veto an A ct o f
Legislature by the Referendum is as self-evident as my right to veto the act o f
my servant, who proposes to commit me to an offensive proposition. The
Americans are still a free people, in theory at least, and the general establishment
o f the Initiative and Referendum is o f the highest importance for the preserva
tion o f that freedom and the full enjoyment o f their liberties.
The Referendum will rarely be used, because it will rarely happen that the
American traction company will buy franchises worth forty millions from the
local legislature or city council for eight hundred and thirty-seven dollars when
both the rascal legislator and the traction company know that a Referendum vote
will veto their rascality. No money in advance will be paid on such a transaction,
with the power o f the Referendum hanging over it like the Sword o f Damocles.
With the Initiative in force a Corrupt Practices Act and a pure ballot can be
•secured. Oregon has the best Corrupt Practices Act in the United States.
There a candidate for the Senate is limited to an expense o f ten per cent o f
one year’s salary as the maximum expense o f making his campaign, and so with
other State officials. Every dollar o f expenditure must be set forth under oath,
to include every person who directly or indirectly expends any money in the
interest o f such candidate.
The Secretary o f State mails each voter in the State a small pamphlet in
which the claims for and against each candidate for nomination is set forth. A
like pamphlet is issued before the election; a like pamphlet covers the met its
and demerits o f every measure initiated by the Initiative, or opposed by the
Referendum. The candidates pay a hundred dollars a page and are limited to
four pages.
N o solicitation or bringing o f voters to the polls is allowed on election day
The election is as peaceful and as honest as a Sunday School. I wish we might
say as much o f New Y ork or o f Philadelphia or Boston.
Under the Initiative and Referendum the Oregon Legislature tries to meet
the will o f the people. They are not subject to temptation by every corruption
or ambition. . I f they fail to pass the laws the people want the people pass their
own laws with the Initiative.
If they pass a law the people don’t want, the people veto it through the use
7
of the Referendum. This system of Government is called the People’s Rule,
and what citizen, when he understands it, will vote against the Initiative and
Referendum; will vote against his own right to rule his own State by his own
vote; will vote to deny himself the right to select and nominate the standard
bearer of his own party?
Is it difficult to establish this system? Not at all.In the last few years,
since the matter is understood, it has been adopted by Oregon, South Dakota,
and Maine, by Oklahoma, Montana, and Missouri, and is being actively pushed
in a large number o f other States, and will be adopted throughout the United
States in a very few years. The agency by which it is accomplished is another
device of good government, called “ The Questioning of Candidates.”
This is
most conveniently done by the organization of a legislative committee represent
ing large groups o f voters. For instance, the National Grange, the American
Federation of Labor,, the Initiative and Referendum Leagues. Each organization
appoints its chairman of a legislative committee, and all the chairmen sign a
common letter addressed to each candidate of all parties, demanding a plain
answer in a given number of days of the question: “ Will you, if elected, use
your full influence to establish the Initiative and Referendum?” If he fail to
answer in two weeks his failure is advertised as opposition and general advertise
ment given of his position, and all those favoring the Initiative and Referendum
vote and work to defeat such candidate.
An Initiative and Referendum League ought to be established in every pre
cinct, in every county, in every State in the Union, all members belonging to
each party having for their object the restoration to the people of the right of
self-government through the Initiative and Referendum, thus taking the powers
of Government out of the hands of the machine politician, the corrupt selfseeker, and freeing Government from the influence of gross commercialism.
Let this joint legislative committee be organized in every State and address
a circular letter to every candidate for office, especially the legislature, the gover
nor, the executive officers, and the judicial officers, and ask them the plain
question—
“ If elected, will you use your best efforts to establish the Initiative and
Referendum and the Direct Primary? Your failure to answer will be taken as
a negative.”
What will his answer be?
When a man is a candidate running against another candidate, he is in a
plastic condition of mind. When he needs votes he is very respectful to the
voters. After he is elected, he is often more difficult to talk to.
We are entering upon the new campaign of 1 9 1 0 , and if this proposed plan
is actively followed, throughout the States of the Union, as I hope it will be,
every candidate for every legislature in the United States will have to meet this
issue. Will you, or will you not support the Initiative and Referendum?
When the Initiative and Referendum shall have been established it is the
open door to the passage of any law the people have the intelligence and
patriotism to devise. The sword of the State will no longer be in the hands of
an arrogant, despotic commercialism that is now shaking the foundations of this
country and making a spectacle of itself in Philadelphia.
When the people can pass the laws they need, uninterrupted by the corrupt
ing sinister influence of sordid selfishness, it will be possible in this country to
prevent the spread of the bubonic plague, which is now making widespread
insidious progress on the Pacific Coast, and was not promptly eradicated because
of the suppression of the truth by the commercialism of San Francisco and
California. We will then be able to pass pure food laws and have those laws
executed, which are now almost nullified by commercialism operating through
8
political agencies. I call as a witness the triumphant success of benzoate of
soda over Dr. Wiley’s protest.
*
We can then prevent the deliberate pollution of our streams and water
supplies; we can then abate the smoke nuisance; we can then control monopoly
and high prices, and we can abate the evils of unrestrained greed, grinding the
life out of women and children in sweat-shops, and we can establish sanitary
precautions, which shall control in greater degree the charnel houses of tuber
culosis, known as lower New York City.
My fellow-citizens, in eight years we have made an annual increase in our
appropriations for the Army and Navy over the average of the years just
preceding, of over a thousand millions of dollars, our patriotism being played
upon in large measure by those concerned in selling us materials of w ar; and
how much have we spent for the National Health? Are we indeed in league
with Death, that we spend a thousand millions on an increase in expenditure for
war purposes and rely on Nathan Straus to abate the killing of babies with
infected milk in New York. The cost of one battleship would build a macadam
road of improved construction between the cities of Chicago and New York
which would pa)' a splendid interest on the investment, while a battleship costs
eight hundred thousand a year for expenses and goes to the junk-heap in
twenty years. The pension roll of the United States o f over a hundred and
fifty millions a year, which is pointed to as the evidence of patriotism, is in fact
the crowning example of the terrible cost of bad government for the reason
that three-fourths o f the deaths and disabilities afflicting our pensioned soldiers
was due to preventable disease and exposure and was not due to the projectiles or
missiles of war. Over three-fourths of these deaths and disabilities, due to
such disease,, were preventable and will be prevented in future under a wise and
virtuous administration o f government, only possible when the powers of the
government are restored to and capable of being exercised by the people them
selves. Seventy per cent of our national expenditures are due either to the wars
of the past, through the pension roll, o f wars in anticipation through the Army,
Navy, etc. If we, the people o f the United States, follow the great example of
the Australian states, adopt the Initiative and Referendum, we can then adopt
improved methods of self-government, we can abolish monopolies and com
mercial oppression, we can then restore the political and physical health of the
Nation. Our example will become the standard for the civilized world and will
lead to universal peace; will lead to the brotherhood o f man; the peaceful
federation of the world, where under beneficent law, unwilling and unmerited
poverty shall be abolished, every raan be fed and clothed in comfort, decently
housed, and afforded reasonable recreation for himself and his family; where
men may learn under these better conditions to love each other and to know that
crime itself is due to poverty, to ignorance, to temptation, to mental or physical
defect born of conditions growing out o f bad government; then the human race
will take care of its criminals and restore them to society by humane treatment;
by kind treatment; then society will only find it necessary to restrain those who
are imbecile and insane, among whom should be classed the perverted and
habitual criminal. There is an abundance in this world to supply all men with
every necessity of food, clothing, shelter, leisure, education, and happiness, and
to furnish every luxury for those who care to seek it. It remains for the highminded intelligent patriotism of the people of the United States to set an example
to the whole world that shall give our great Republic its place in history as the
leader of the world in establishing the divine doctrine of the fatherhood of God
and the brotherhood of man.
L
RACE CONSERVATION— THE CONSERVATION OF HUMAN
LIFE AND EFFICIENCY— THE DEPARTM ENT OF
H E A LTH AND THE SO-CALLED LEAGUE
OF MEDICAL FREEDOM
SPEECH
OF
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
O F
O K L A H O M A
IN THE
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
FRIDAY, JUNE 23, 1911
-D
W ASH IN G T O N
101 G9.S— 10132
1011
&
•
»
*»■ *
Of
S P E E C II
OF
I I ON. E O B E K T
L.
OWEN.
Tlie Senate having under consideration the hill H. R. 4412—
* *
>
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P k e s i d e n t : For many years various efforts Have been
made to establish a department of health of the United States,
and during the last year both Houses of Congress have been
considering this question, and the most overwhelming evidence
has been submitted in the Senate and House hearings justifying
the establishment of such department. There has arisen in
opposition to the department of health an organized movement
resisting the establishment of the department, under a socalled League of Medical Freedom, on the alleged ground that
it would promote one school of medicine over another school of
medicine and invade the rights of the States and of individual
citizens.
I introduced at the beginning of the present session Senate
bill No. 1, providing for the establishment of a department of
health, which did not place the head of that department in the
Cabinet, but which expressly provided against any possible
invasion of State or of individual rights and against any dis
crimination for or against any so-called system or school of
medicine.
Mr. President, I am entirely opposed to promoting one school
of medicine over another school of medicine. M purpose in
urging a department of public health has been to establish a
department of human conservation—educational rather than
regulative—which should deal with the matter from an educa
tional standpoint, so as to make effective and efficient the
knowledge which we are slowly acquiring with regard to the
preservation of human life.
And the preservation of human life does not deal primarily
with the curing of a man after he is desperately sick. It
should not be regarded as a science devoted to the cure of
bubonic plague after bubonic pleague has been established in
the human organism. It should not deal with the question of
tuberculosis after it has been contracted, but it should deal
with this terrible disease by preventive means. The important
point is to prevent it—not to merely cure it. These diseases
are easy to prevent, but almost impossible to cure.
A department of human conservation—called, for convenience,
a department of health—wouldjiaturally deal with instructing
the people of the United States in well-ascertained facts with
regard to sanitary engineering, sanitary construction of streets,
alieys, houses, sewerage, water supply, milk supply, and food
supplies generally; proper care of the markets, the control of
insect life, which is so frequently the cause of disease, as in the
10169S— 10132
i*
1
1
3
4
cases of the malaria and yellow-fever mosquito; the extermina
tion of the house fly, with its typhoid-fever germ; and the edu
cation of the people, through circulars, authoritative publica
tions, through the schools, and through special instructors on
the rules of right living.
The instruction of the people as to the value of ffesh air,
clean air, clean bodies, the proper use of the bath and hot and
cold water, and the proper precautions to guard against infec
tious diseases. It would disseminate full and complete knowl
edge relative to diseases of sex now prevalent throughout the
United States and throughout the world by reason of the gross
ignorance of young people arriving at the age of puberty with
no knowledge whatever upon this vital topic and thus exposed
by gross ignorance to the most dangerous maladies.
These things, and much other interesting information, which,
under proper guidance, could be made the common knowledge
and the common property o f the people of the United States,
operating through the municipal, State, and Federal agencies,
within their strict constitutional limitations, are of vital im
portance to the people o f the United States, to their health and
longevity and to their happiness; to their physical, mental, and
moral tvell-being. Our insane asylums are full of syphilitics.
Our blind institutions are filled in like manner through venereal
diseases. Our cities are filled with tuberculosis victims carry
ing disease of the most malignant character into the houses of
the rich and the poor, especially the poor.
I desire the country to understand that the purpose of the
department of health is in x
’eality that of race conservation,
the preservation of human life and of human energy, and that
there is great need for the cooperation of all classes of men,
including the Christian Scientists, who have undoubtedly been
of genuine public service in teaching people better methods of
self-control. This is also true with regard to the school of
osteopathy, as well as other so-called schools of medicine, chief
of which are the so-called regular physicians, sometimes called
allopaths and homeopaths.
We need prevention more than cure, however. We have not
so much tlip need for the regular physician, as his function is
generally understood—that is, as a man who will give medi
cine to cure a sick patient, as we have need for his services,
and for the services of all schools of medicine, in their far more
important aspect of preventing diseases by instructing patients,
whether sick or well, in the rules of right living.
This, indeed, is the great work which has been done by the
regular physician, and which has been done likewise by other
schools of medicine not known as regulars and by men who
were not physicians at all. The great Pasteur was a chemist,
not a physician. Dr. Wylie is a food expert, not a medical
practitioner. It seems to me that all good men who desire the
welfare of the human race should be favorable to the establish
ment of a department of public health, which shall not give
special preferment to any school of medicine or system of medi
cine, but which shall devote itself to the conservation of the
human race, and which shall study with care and with patience
all claims of all schools of men engaged in the art of healing,
in the more important art of preventing disease and ill health.
This will include osteopaths, Christian Scientists, physical culturists. and a great variety of students of human health.
101G9S— 10132
o
►
I
#» *
I
I have drawn Senate bill No. 1 in such a way that the pro
posed department is not permitted to discriminate in favor of
any school or system of medicine; so that it shall not invade
any function of any State; so that it shall not enter the house
of any individual without his free consent and invitation.
The real function of a department of public health is to pre
vent disease. The cure of diseases should not comprise onetwentieth part of the activities of such a department. What
we want is to prevent people being made sick, not merely to
attempt to cure them when they are ready for the grave.
In this connection I call attention to a very important de
partment established by the Equitable Life Assurance Society
of New York, a description of which appears in the New York
Commercial. William A. Day, president of the Equitable Life
Assurance Society, has just announced the organization of a
“ conservation department,” with Elmer E. Rittenhouse, former
president of the Provident Savings Life Assurance Society, at
its head. It proposes to circularize the millions of men who
hold policies in that assurance society on the gentle art of
self-care as a means of the preservation of their own health,
the care of the health of their families, their households, and
they expect to use this system as a practical money-making
proposition, because, having assured the life of their policy
holders, they want to prolong their lives as much as possible.
The New York Commercial, of June 17, 1911, makes the fol
lowing announcement:
[New York Commercial, June 17, 1911.]
“ EQ UITABLE E S T A B L IS H E S CONSERVATION D EPARTM EN T---- EL. IER E. R IT T E N IIO U SE TO BE C O M M ISSIO N E R IN CHARGE---- PURPOSE OF N E W BUREAU
W IL L BE TO CONSERVE H E A L T H AND L IV E S OF P O L IC Y HOLDERS AND
PREVENT L A P SE S ---- EDUCATIONAL AND SAN ITAR Y CAM PAIG N PLANNED.
“ William A. Day, president of the Equitable Life Assurance
Society, yesterday announced the inauguration of a ‘ conserva
tion department,’ with Elmer ID Rittenhouse, former president
.
of the Provident Savings Life Assurance Society, at its head.
Mr. Rittenhouse will be known as the ‘ conservation commis
sioner.’
“ The purpose of the new department is to carry into effect
one of the new ideas in life insurance, that of conserving the
health and lives of present policy holders and preventing lapses.
Mr. Rittenhouse attracted wide attention in his former con
nection by instituting a campaign of medical assistance for
policy holders, and recently the Association o f Life Insurance
Presidents started a health conservation bureau.
“ At a meeting this week of the association one of the members
reported the results of an inspection he had made of the sanitary
conditions of 32 cities of the country, and he suggested the or
ganization of local sanitary clubs.
“ The Equitable, however has gone into the matter more ex
tensively. The announcement setting forth the news of the new
appointment says:
“ All life insurance companies suffer from two sources of waste or loss,
which have been given much study-and which continue to cost the
policy holders large sums annually. One is the annual loss of life from
preventable or postponable cause. The other is the loss due to the
costly American habit of lapsing policies.
“ The life companies of the country lost from this source last year over
.$700,000,000 of insurance already on their books, which cost the policy
holders of the United States over $20,000,000 to put on the books.
10169S— 10132
*
6
Over 26,000,000 policy holders are therefore personally and financially
interested in the reduction of the loss from both these causes.
“ The society will assist its members by educational and perhaps other
methods to reduce life waste. It will also extend such help as it legally
may to the public-health authorities of the country in their efforts to
improve sanitary and general health conditions. It will give its moral
support to the general life-conservation movement which has reached
nation-wide proportions and already accomplished much in favorably
affecting tire mortality rate of the country.
“ This phase of the ‘ efficiency problem ’ will be given especial atten
tion and the measures adopted to favorably affect it will be made known
as the work develops.
“ It is believed that before the end of another five years every
life insurance company of consequence will have a department
designed not only to conserve business, but to lower mortality.
The Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., of this city, has had great
success in its industrial field with its nursing service and the
wide distribution of literature setting forth measures to pre
vent tuberculosis.
“ The Equitable, however, will go further than this, according
to present plans. It will use its agents and medical men all
over the country to cooperate with the local health boards for
the purpose of improving sanitary conditions, and it will use
the ‘ conservation department ’ for the purpose of getting into
close touch with individual policy holders.”
I respectfully submit an answer to President Huntington, of
the Connecticut General Insurance Co., by Prof. Irving Fisher,
of Yale University, president-of the Committee of One Hundred
on National Health, on the more obvious benefits a department
of health would have over the present Marine-Hospital Bureau:
4G0 P rospect S treet, April 21, 1911,
President R obert W. H u n tin g to n , Jr.,
Connecticut General Life Insurance Co., Hartford, Conn.
D ear Sir : Senator O w en lias written me that you have in
quired of him as to the functions which a new national depart
ment of health could profitably assume which are not already
sufficiently covered by the Public Health and Marine-Hospital
Service and the other bureaus of the United States Government.
I think one of the best arguments in favor of such a depart
ment is contained in the speech of Senator O w en himself, which
I am therefore sending 5 -0 1 1 under a separate cover. You will
notice that his argument shows the utter inadequacy in times of
stress of a bureau like the Public Health and Marine-Hospital
Service under a department the head of which usually does not
know and does not care in regard to public health and whose
interests, even, are sometimes directly opposed. Except in the
life insurance business and some others there is, at least as my
studies have led me to believe, a very common conflict between
commercial interests and public-health interests. It was for
this reason that the 5 'ellow fever was systematically concealed
in Southern States for fear that its presence would interfere
with trade, and it was only as the States there finally appealed
to the United States Government to take over the quarantine
stations that the intolerable situation by which each locality
denied the existence of yellow fever, while accusing the neigh
boring States of having it, was done away with.
The San Francisco episode is one which Senator O w en em
phasizes. He does not overdraw- the situation in the least, as I
known by information direct from Dr. John S. Fulton and Dr.
101G9S— 10132
dy
7
■
J. J. Kinyoun, who were directly concerned, and the former of
whom made a special investigation. A number of representa
tives of San Francisco commercial interests were sent to Wash
ington to prevent the knowledge of the bubonic plague’s exist
ence in San Francisco from being spread by the United States
Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service, and they would
have succeeded had it not been for the fact that Dr. Fulton,
then secretary of the board of health of Maryland, had a suit
case of documents containing facts on the subject, with which
he was able to confront the lies which the delegation from
California were trying to spread, simply for the benefit of a few
merchants in San Francisco and to the prejudice and danger of
the heal 1 11 of the entire country.
I believe that the theme of commercial versus hygienic in
terests has not been exhausted in Senator O w e n ’s speech, and
that many other instances, equally important, could be given,
some of which I am not free to mention, as they have come to
me in a more or less confidential manner. Some of these con
cern the administration of the Bureau of Chemistry in the De
partment of Agriculture and the Bureau of Animal Industry
in regard to meat inspection. With a Department of Agricul
ture, the main object of which is to improve the prosperity of
farmers, including cattle raisers, it is not surprising that the
inspection of meats and foods should often be aborted in the
interests of the producers, for whom a Department of Agri
culture largely exists, but against the much more important
interests of the consumers who suffer from the ingestion of
deleterious products. I do not believe that those who have
not looked into this subject have the faintest conception of the
extent to which the public is injured in this matter.
Dr. Wiley, who, in spite of accusations of going to extremes,
is certainly a friend of the public interests, is very enthusiastic
over the project of having a department of health, and one of
his chief arguments is that such a department would afford the
only good soil in which bureaus concerned with public health
can really grow and flourish. Such bureaus, as long as they
are subject to ministers of finance, agriculture, labor, commerce,
etc., can never work untrammeled for the public good whenever
a conflict of interests exists between the public good and that
of the special interests of finance, agriculture, commerce, labor,
etc. But the instant we have a department of health, with a
secretary whose sworn duty it is to improve the health of the
people, that instant we shall have the conditions for the untram
meled exercise of health protection by existing as well as newly
created bureaus concerned in public health.
Another great advantage comes from the assembling together
of the bureaus now existing and which sometimes work at cross
purposes. There would be cooperation instead of duplication,
mutual helpfulness and encouragement, and the growth which
comes out of these conditions; in other words, economy and
efficiency.
There would, I believe, be no. need and no probability of
duplication of work, as between the national and the State de
partments of health, any more than there is now a duplication
as between the State departments and the municipal depart
ments. The spheres of work of the two would be very different,
not only as required by law but also because of the cooperation
101G0S— 10132
1 1
8
which would necessarily result. A s proof of this w e have a
precedent in the Departm ent of A griculture, which has, I be
lieve, never been accused of duplicating the work o f the State
agricultural experiment stations and colleges, but o f helping
them. In fact, there are other analogies, as between the United
States A rm y organization and the State m ilitia, which is a rela
tion o f mutual helpfulness. T h is aspect has been form erly con
sidered by D r. W illia m C. W oodw ard, health officer o f the city
o f W ashington, who could give 3*011 more and better instances
than occur to me offhand. Suffice it to say that the project for
a department o f health has been indorsed by the conference of
State and Territorial boards o f health and by a large number of
individual municipal health officers.
In fact, I do not know
o f any local health officers who have opposed a national depart
ment of health as duplicating their work. These people are, in
general, the most enthusiastic of all for a national department
of health, realizing that such a department would give an im
petus to the interest in public health which would increase their
own power and influence at one bound.
T h e Public H ealth and M arine-H ospital Service, in its labora
tory, has done great work in investigations, and I believe this is
self-evidence of how much more could be accomplished if a
larger sphere could be given to such investigations. Hookworm
and pellagra, though important, are very trifling exam ples as
compared w ith the results w hich we m ight liqpe for w ith a
larger sphere. The greatest hygienic advances which the world
h as seen have come out o f such department laboratories abroad,
particularly the French work o f Pasteur, which is the founda
tion of modern bacteriology, and the German work o f Koch,
which has done so much for tuberculosis. Proof o f w hat can
be done comes from the exam ple o f the Departm ent o f A gricul
ture, which has solved the many problems o f anim al and plant
disease by putting experts to work to direct their energies to
these specific objects. Some o f the best work for public health
has been an incidental result, as, for instance, the work o f the
Bureau of Entom ology, under D r. H oward, w hich has shown
the influence o f the typhoid fly, as lie calls the common house
fly, and as a consequence o f which there is a country-wide
antifly as well as antimosquito crusade.
A fte r a number o f years of study o f the possibilities o f inves
tigation, I am satisfied that there is no subject w ith which I
am at all fam ilia r in which there are so many unexploited pos
sibilities as in public health. For instance, in spite of all the
work f o r improved ventilation and the crusade for outdoor
living in connection w ith the fight against tuberculosis, w e do
not j'et know w hat are the specific qualities o f good as distinct
from bad air. The old theory of carbon dioxide has been almost
completely exploded, and we have now sim ply a great m ass of
conflicting working hypotheses; ns, for instance, that it is the
coolness, dryness, hum idity, motion, electrification, ionization,
ozone condition, freedom from organic impurities, freedom from
bacteria, etc., which explains good air as distinct from bad.
T h e instant this problem is solved, the question can be solved
w ith it, and we shall know whether the proper m eans is to use
an ozone machine, humidifier, an electric fan, or some other
device.
101G98— 10132
9
I do not for a moment doubt that the establishment of a
national department of health would lengthen human life very
materially, also rapidly, for, besides the above-mentioned ad
vantages, would come a general education of the public. This
would take place through bulletins and the use of the public
press and in other ways, such as visual exhibits, etc., in a
manner similar to the way in which the Department of Agricul
ture has educated the farmer. A department can do this where
a bureau can not, not ouly because the head would be more
sympathetic with such work, .but also because a department
would have so much more prestige and would attract more at
tention. The groat problem of education of the public consists,
I believe, as newspaper men affirm, in getting the ear of the
public. It is the large headlines which do the work of molding
public opinion, and on the same principle it is a large depart
ment rather than a small bureau which will get the public ear.
The Department of Agriculture when it was an independent
bureau did not have a tithe of the influence which it now
possesses.
It is a fact that life has been prolonged or death rates de
creased fastest and best where there have been good depart
ments of health. Statistics show that the country of most
rapid advance in recent years is Germany, the only country
which really has a true department of health. In this country
the cities which have good departments of health show the
result by a lower death rate, as witness New York, Chicago, and
Washington, all of which places have remarkably good health
officers. In New York the death rate responded at once to the
cleaner streets of Col. Waring, to the improved milk crusade,
to the tuberculosis notification law, etc., just as so many cities
have responded at once to the introduction of water plants. By
the way,' Mr. Calvin W. Hendrick, who is putting in a several
million dollar new sewerage system in Baltimore, is an enthu
siastic advocate of a national department of health in order
that it may supply models for municipal sanitation in respect
to sewerage systems, etc., believing that in this manner such
improvements as lie is making in Baltimore could be communi
cated with great rapidity to other municipalities, which will
probably not get these improvements otherwise within a gener
ation. The average “ city father ” is conservative and will not
run to Baltimore or any other city for information when lie
would take it as a matter of course from a department of
health.
As I see it, the situation, in brief, is: First, that there is a
great field for hygienic investigation unexploited; second, that
the present scientific knowledge is a full generation in advance
of its practical application; third, that in order both that
knowledge shall increase and that present knowledge shall be
applied we need a mechanism like a department of health which,
like the Department of Agriculture, will perform the needed
investigations and spread the existing knowledge.
I fear I am worrying you. There are many other things I
would like to say. I take the liberty of sending with this a
copy of my address before the Association of Life Insurance
Presidents on the subject of the prolongation of human life, and
a copy of a more recent address before the International Asso
ciation of Accident Underwriters on the same subject. Various
101G9S— 10132
1
0
insurance associations and companies, including the Interna
tional Association of Accident Underwriters, have passed resolu
tions favoring a department of health.
If you have not seen my report to President Roosevelt on Na
tional Vitality, and would care to look it over, I should be much
pleased to have the opportunity of sending you a copy. Life
insurance men are showing a great interest in the subject at
present, as you doubtless know. Mr. Messenger, actuary of the
Travelers’ Life Insurance Co., is one of the Hartford men most
interested. President Holcombe, President Dunham, Vice Presi
dent Lunger, and others are also interested.
If I can be of any service to you at any time, I should be very
much pleased.
Yours, very sincerely,
--------------------.
Great and organized opposition to the establishment of a de
partment of health has been carried on by a so-called League for
Medical Freedom. This league has many good people in it who
are misled— Christian Scientists who deny disease, and some
good citizens who have been falsely led to believe their liberty
will be invaded—-some people who do not think, and some people
who have an evil purpose, a sinister commercial purpose, who
are engaged in promoting patent medicine. There is a descrip
tion in Collier’s on May 6 and June 3 of this League of Medical
Freedom, which is of sufficient interest to justify its being read
to the Senate, but without objection I will, Mr. President, in
sert it in the R ecord without reading.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there objection?
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, I shall have to object to
the request.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Objection is made.
Mr. OWEN. I will then proceed to read into the R ecord
this extract. It is as follow s:
[From Collier’s, May 0, 1911.]
“ A BAD BU N CH .
“An octopus which we don’t like is the League for Medical
Freedom. It is doing a tremendous amount of damage by its
opposition to needed medical legislation along all lines relating
to the public health throughout the United States. In the excel
lent California Legislature, for instance, this year, efforts for
better sanitary laws were largely blocked by this organization,
thoroughly equipped with ready money, and extensive in its
hold upon the imaginative minds of many citizens. These
gophers have worked underground, since the league came into
existence, to counteract the pure food and drugs act of 1906.
The membership is composed for the most part of those who
were hit hard by the act. Expensive lobbies are maintained at
Washington, and in many State capitals, for the purpose of
defeating health legislation. In 1909-1911 important bills relat
ing to the health of the Nation were held up in Congress at the
instigation of the league. It is alleged that $25,000 per week
was spent by the league lobby. There is probably no accurate
way of computing the amounts that have been spent in Wash
ington or at the various State capitals. One method of attack
consists in sending showers of telegrams of protest to the
Senators and Representatives from all parts of the Union, and
101G98-— 10132
11
especially from the home districts o f the lawmakers. These
protests are invariably misrepresentations of the real purpose
of the proposed legislation. Organizations have been formed in
every State of the Union, and attorneys employed to represent
the league before conventions, legislative committees, and
municipal meetings of all kinds. Another plan of procedure is
to send circular letters to delegates of conventions requesting
them, in the name of “ liberty and fraternity,” to vote against
any medical resolution that might be introduced. It has always
been difficult to get appropriations for health purposes, and if
this league continues to fight the health authorities we must
expect an increase in the death rate in all States in the next
year or two. In Chicago, where the league is strongest, in 1908
the death rate was 14.0S per 1,000 per annum; in 1910 it was
15.21 per 1 ,0 0 0 .”
I remind the Senate that the chairman of the Committee on
Public Health had a thousand telegrams put in his hands on
one day, coming through the agents o f this so-called League of
Medical Freedom, opposing the department of health, although
the department of health proposed nothing in the world except
the coordination of Federal activities that we already have and
putting them together under one intelligent management.
Many citizens telegraphed who thought they would be sub
jected to compulsory vaccination, who thought their domiciles
would bo invaded. Many engaged in the art of healing and
preventing disease protested under the false assurance that a
department of race conservation and of human health meant
that they would be denied a license to practice osteopathy, and
so forth.
Many protested under the erroneous advice that a department
of human conservation of the United States would invade State
rights and interfere with local authority. These manufactured
telegrams and protests had no genuine foundation of fear. They
were manufactured wholesale by sinister commercial forces,
that had an unlimited treasury of money, able to organize at
once these patent-medicine leagues of medical freedom in many
States and flood the press with half-page advertisements in
box-car letters.
Collier's answers some of the victimized members of this
league who protested against the first editorial, as follows:
[From Collier’s, June 3, 1911.]
“ L IB E R T Y .
“ Protests from readers have greeted our criticism of the
League for Medical Freedom. Also a protest is telegraphed from
the California branch of the league. In the minds of most of
those who protest tho principal objections are to the following
positions taken by us: 1. That the league contains the kind of
men who opposed the pure-food act. 2. That the activities of
the league are against public welfare and frequently surrep
titious. Our answer follows:
“ 1. B. O. Flower, one of the nine founders of the league, and
now in his second term as president of it, was president of
‘ The II. C. Flower Medicine Co.’ from 1S85 to 1899. It. C.
Flower is the notorious quack and general humbug whose latest
arrest was as late as 1908. B. O. Flower wrote the league’s
pamphlets on Bubonic Plague and The Compulsory Medical
101G9S— 10132
12
Inspection of School Children. Ilis views on patent medicine
are often expressed. For instance:
“ I believe that a great majority of the proprietary medicines are in
finitely less dangerous to the public than the majority of regular doc
tors’ prescriptions.
“ 2. C. W. Miller, second vice president of the league, was also
one of the founders. In his newspaper, which publishes patent
medicine advertising, he has constantly fought the medical
profession. Last year one of his addresses against what he
calls a ‘ doctors’ trust’ was delivered to the Dairy Association
in Baltimore. We may say in passing that Collier’s does not
believe in freedom to sell tuberculous milk any more than it
does in freedom to sell tuberculous meat.
“ 3. Mrs. Diana Belais, a director and also a founder, has ap
peared before in this paper as president of an antiexperiment
society, a well-meaning, ignorant, reckless, and muddle-headed
agitator. We are officially informed by the chairman of the
‘ committee on publicity and education ’ of the league that
Mrs. Belais was made a director ‘ because of her courageous
efforts to secure a higher law in New York State than the
doctors’ cruel theories and professional arrogance.’ Here’s to
antiexperiment, meningitis, diptheria, and freedom!
“ 4. Dr. C. S. Carr, who is on the advisory boards, edits a pseudo
medical sheet. Collier’s long ago printed a letter signed ‘ The
Peruna Drug Co., per Carr.’ As editor of Medical Talk for the
Home he carried advertisements of many of the medicines ex
posed in Collier’s in our series on ‘ The great American fraud.’
He is now editor of the Columbus Medical Journal, which he
at once turned from an ethical siieet into a sheer fraud. Look
at the issue of May, 1909. On the front cover is a picture of
Carr himself writing, ‘All drugs are poison. All druggists are
poisoners.’ On the reverse side is an advertisement beginning,
‘ Prescribe Antikamnia and Codein tablets in la grippe, head
aches, etc.’ Hurrah for freedom and Peruna !
“ 5. George P. Englehard, who is on the advisory board, has
for a long time in his journal defended the patent-medicine
interests.
" G Charles Huhn, also a member of the board, is a prominent
.
officer in a cooperative patent-medicine concern.
“ 7. Another founder was a member of the advertising agency
which is now spending for the league the money which it puts
into its advertising campaigns.
“ The league says it did not oppose any ‘ sanitary or quarantine
laws.’ This statement requires some hardihood, as the hearings
of the Senate Committee on Health, and more especially of the
House Committee on Foreign and Interstate Commerce, show.
It would interest us to know whether the league can point out
a single health bill introduced in Congress which it has not
opposed. When the leaders wish to oppose a sanitary or quaran
tine law they do it on the ground that such a law would in
directly ‘ lead to compulsory and discriminatory legislation.’
“ The league was nominally born recently, but those who make
it up had already as individuals, and even as organizations
(such as the Colorado League for Medical Liberty), opposed
State and national legislation. A pamphlet published by the
Colorado branch singles out Collier’s for attack, and was writ
ten by a notorious quack doctor. In California, which was the
101698— 10132
13
special tlieme of onr former editorial, if the league should pre
vail, the next threat of bubonic plague would be carried out,
instead of being suppressed like the last; smallpox might again
become a serious epidemic; school children would bear their ills
as best they might. A bill was introduced ordering that the
board of health be composed of 2 ‘ allopaths’ (a school which
does not exist, but is a hostile term for regular physicians), 3
homeopaths, 2 ‘ eclectics,’ 2 osteopaths. It did not pass.”
“ Some leading homeopathists and osteopathists, be it said, are
in favor of a national health bureau and strongly against the
agitations of the league. Dr. Francis B. Kellogg, president of
the California State Homeopathic Society, in an address re
cently said:
“ * *
* In my opinion there is an effort being made to exploit the
homeopathic profession by influences and interests which are indirectly
hut radically opposed to the welfare not only of practitioners of medi
cine in general, but to that of humanity itself. I refer to the effort to
enlist homeopathic support for the so-called National League for
Medical Freedom.
“ Plato complained that in his day doctors made too sharp a
distinction between the body and the mind. In our day the best
class of physicians frequently recommend faith cure and Chris
tian Science, and the Emmanuel movement is an indication that
it is possible for science and religion to work together in healing.
Few mere observers rate the benefits that Christian Science has
brought to the community more highly than we do. A belief
which so frequently brings about an actual improvement in
character, disposition, bodily health, and mental atmosphere
deserves the most serious recognition, even by those who regret
its hostility to the progressive science of medicine. It is possi
ble at times for clever designers to use members of any faith for
disastrous purposes. When It. C. Flower was at the height of
his career, in 1907, as manufacturer of diamonds, vender of fake
mining stock, wearer of most ingenious disguises, tfaveler un
der assumed names, and general artist in gold bricks, he con
ceived the idea of playing for profit upon the earnest beliefs of
the followers of Mrs. Eddy. One of his accomplices, a woman,
who also used an assumed name, worked the game with him,
and when Dr. Flower, alias Mr. Cortland, took up the cudgels
in defense of Christian Science, without being requested to do
so, he said:
“ Not that I am one of its disciples, but I like to see everyone free to
practice medicine as he wishes.
“ Here we have the very words themselves from old Doc
Flower. Up with freedom !
“ Everybody who believes in *freedom ’ in medicine is within
his natural and political rights in supporting this league. Col
lier’s, not believing in this species of *freedom,’ is also within
its rights in treating the league as a menace, the make-up, bias,
and purpose of which ought to be fully understood.”
I have a few more editorials from the American Medical
Association Journal, which.I shall rqad into the B ecokd for the
benefit of the Senate.
Mr. President, the membership of this so-called league. In my
judgment, have been deliberately misled by sinister interests,
and the membership which has been thus added to these alleged
101098— 10132
14
rolls of membership has no means of expressing itself. The ex
pression comes through its officers. Those officers are described
by Collier's, and I think it would be well for the membership
of that organization to look to the directors and see who they
are and understand what is at the bottom of this movement.
That is the purpose of my reading into the E e c o r d the history
of this so-called organization. I shall now read some editorials
from the Journal of the American Medical Association:
SO M E ED ITO R IA L S FRO M T H E JO U RN AL OF T H E A M E R IC A N M EDICAL A SSO
C IA T IO N — T H E AM E R IC A N M EDICAL A S SO C IA T IO N CALLED A TRU ST .
“ ‘ Trust ’ is a good word to juggle with nowadays, for to most
people it conjures up visions of extortion, robbery, and general
oppression. When, therefore, any organization is to be attacked
and there are no tangible charges to be preferred against it, it
is dubbed a ‘ trust,’ and by that very token is damned in the
premises.”
I want to say right here that in my State half-page adver
tisements in huge letters were spread all over that State by
this so-called League for Medical Freedom, practically de
nouncing the medical profession of this country as being a
“ medical trust,” desirous of depriving citizens of their rights
to employ any physician they pleased, to use any medicine they
pleased, and giving it to be understood that the purpose of a
department of health was the invasion of the private home of
the citizen and the invasion of the constitutional rights of the
State. The members of the so-called League for Medical Free
dom have been grossly imposed upon and have been grossly
misrepresented as to what they truly stand for. I know what
many of their members stand for perfectly well, and I am in
accord with them cordially and sincerely. I know what the
Christian Scientists stand for, and I sympathize with them; I
understand.what the osteopaths stand for, too, and I think they
serve a good and useful purpose. They have been misled by
the agents of the patent medicine association in this country,
that are actively engaged in promoting the drug habit in our
citizens, and this declaration on the part of the so-called League
for Medical Freedom against the American Medical Association
is not only unjust and unfair, but it is disgraceful and utterly
untrustworthy.
The article continues:
“ In this manner the American Medical Association becomes
the *doctors’ trust,’ according to the ‘ National League for
Medical Freedom’ and other organizations with equally highsounding and misleading names, fathered by the ‘ patent-medi
cine ’ interests. Not that the term originated with this widely
advertised ‘ league,’ although some 15 or 16 years ago the presi
dent of this ‘ league ’ attacked the medical profession in a
magazine article on ‘ Medical monopoly.’ The representatives
and mouthpieces of the proprietary interests have long employed
it; notably Strong, through his two journals, the National Drug
gist and the Medical Brief, and Engelhard, through his journals,
the Western Druggist and the Medical Standard. As the pro
prietors of these publications are found among (he personnel of
the ‘ league’ it is natural that this latest ‘ patent-medicine’
organization should have appropriated a figure of speech pos
sessing such magnificent potentialities.
101098— 10132
15
“ To the proprietary men the American Medical Association
is a trust because, they allege, it has attempted to dictate to
physicians what medicinal preparations they shall and shall not
use; or, to put it more baldly, because the fraudulency and
worthlessness of various proprietary products have been made
clear in the Journal. Others have accused the association of
being a trust because it has attempted to raise the standard of
medical education and thereby to *control the output of medical
students.’ But the reason advanced by the ‘ league ’ is a
brand-new one, invented, no doubt, in the hope that it will reach
the public’s heart through its most direct route—the purse. The
American Medical Association is a trust, we are told, because it
has established a schedule of prices by which all its members
are bound. The president of the ‘ league ’ is reported as saying:
“ Tlie [American Medical] Association now fixes the prices charged by
physicians in America.
“ More specifically the ‘ league’s ’ vice president puts i t :
“ The American Medical Association has secured the adoption of its
scale of prices throughout the country. * * *
“ To such a charge there is but one answer; and that an allsufficient one, viz, that it is a falsehood, and a stupid one at
that. Every physician and every layman who has ever investi
gated the matter knows that as a matter of fact the American
Medical Association has never even suggested that the ‘ price ’
of medical service be ‘ fixed,’ but on the contrary has positive!}7
discouraged such a proposition. The recommendation in the
Principles of Medical Ethics that individual physicians in any
locality should adopt some general rules ‘ relative to the mini
mum pecuniary acknowledgment from their patients,’ has been
taken and an attempt made to read into it a meaning never
intended and certainly never accepted. What the attitude of
the association is on this point is well set forth in the standard
Constitution and By-laws for County Societies, prepared by a
committee o f the American Medical Association and recom
mended and very generally adopted by various county societies:
“ S ec. 3. Agreements and schedules of fees shall not be made by this
society. * * *
“And yet the falsehood is blazoned forth, with a prodigal dis
regard for the expense entailed, by means of display advertise
ments and ‘ interviews,’ that the American Medical Association
‘ fixes the price ’ o f medical service. Of course, the ‘ league ’ had
to have some shibboleth, and the accusation that the American
Medical Association is a ‘ trust’ is an untruth that may b e ’
counted on to arouse the interest of the unthinking and to give
a more or less plausible excuse for the ‘ league’s ’ existence.
How absurdly mendacious the accusation is the medical profes
sion already knows and the public will not be long in learning.
“Again we say: The publicity which the ‘ patent-medicine’
interests are giving to the American Medical Association through
this ‘ league ’ is welcomed. The more the people know about
the association and the work it is doing, the keener the investi
gation made of its methods and alms, the better it will be not
only for the American Medical Association and the medical pro
fession of the country, hut also, more important than all, for the
public itself.” (Editorial, Journal American Medical Associa
tion.)
• 101G0S— 10132
lb
Mr. President, the American Medical Association lias pub
lished at great length scientific and careful analyses of most of
(he nostrums and patent-medicine frauds of this country. They
have given wide publicity to it, and in that way they have
excited the violent animosity and hostility of the patentmedicine people, so that the declaration is made by them that
the medical profession comprises a trust. In point of fact, if
the American Medical Society form a trust and if they are
concerned in establishing a department of health with a view
to preventing sickness, which would be the purpose of a de
partment of health, they would be engaged in tearing down
their own business; they would be engaged in depriving them
selves of their patients from whom they make their living. It
would be the only trust in existence which is concerned in
diminishing its own revenues and destroying its own financial
foundation. Such a trust as that is a very novel trust and one
that deserves encouragement.
Now, Mr. President, without further objection, I will submit
for printing in the R ecord the concluding editorials.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. G allinger in the chair).
Without objection, permission is granted.
The matter referred to is as follow s:
A N EW CO M B IN ATIO N A G A IN ST T H E AM ERICAN M EDICAL A SSO C IA T IO N .
“ Within the past few days the newspapers of the chief cities
o f the country have carried large advertisements headed, ‘ Do
you want the “ Doctors’ Trust ” to be able to force its opinions
on y o u ?’ These advertisements paint in vivid colors—‘ yellow ’
predominating—the disaster and general destruction that will
follow the formation of a Federal department of health. They
emanate from, or, to be more correct, are signed by, an organiza
tion calling itself the ‘ National League for Medical Freedom.’
In addition to the regular display advertisements the press
agent is supplying matter for the reading pages, and there is
every evidence that the propaganda is not lacking financial sup
port. Of course, the American Medical Association is the bete
noire the ‘ league ’ seeks to k ill; it is the ‘ Medical Trust ’
referred to. Members of the association will be surprised to
learn that if a national department of health is created it will
result in ‘ denying to the people the right to determine for them
selves the kind of medical treatment they shall employ.’ For
this reason, and so far as the advertisements state, for this rea
son only, the National League for Medical Freedom has been
brought into being. As a slogan, under which the real reasons
for organizing may be carefully concealed, it may serve its pur
pose. Most people prefer to have their thinking done for them,
and this alone will prevent the absurdity of such a proposition
as that on which the ‘ league ’ is ostensibly founded becoming
apparent. Yet every person with the most elemental knowledge
of our Government knows that the regulation of the practice of
medicine and the licensing of physicians is a function of the
State, and that any law attempting to confer such power on a
department of the Federal Government would be unconstitu
tional. The proposed department of health would have just as
much authority to determine what ‘ kind of medical treatment ’
the people should employ as the Department of Agriculture has
to dictate to the farmer regarding the implement company he
101G98— 10132
IT
shall buy his plows of. Yet we are asked to believe, apparently,
that a national department of health would mean that the free
born American citizen who wanted to have a purulent appendix
cured by the ‘ spinal adjustment’ route would have to patronize
a surgeon, even though he were a ‘ conscientious objector ’ to
surgery. It would mean, it seems, that the individual suffering
from malaria who wished to be freed from this ‘ moral error ’
by ‘ absent treatment ’ would be ignominiously dragged to the
internist and dosed with quinine. It would mean that the op
timist who would cure his rheumatism by wearing a ‘ guaran
teed magnetic rin g’ would have to endure the administration
of the salicylates. It would mean—but why pursue these har
rowing predictions further?
“ Seriously, though, there must be something wrong with the
mental make-up of the individuals composing this ‘ league ’ who
expect— even by such potent means as the lavish distribution of
printer’s ink— to persuade a reasonably sane people that any
law might, could, or would be enacted that would curtail the
lights of the public as they have suggested. Of course, the fact
is that the moving spirits behind the organization of the
‘ league’ have neither an overwhelming solicitude for the public
welfare nor any strenuous objection to the formation of a na
tional department of health. The ‘ league’s ’ actual, and fairly
evident, raison d’etre is opposition to and antagonism against
the American Medical Association. To disclose the source of
this opposition it is only necessary to call attention to some of
the members of the ‘ advisory board ’—high-sounding title—as
reported in the newspapers, to make reasonably clear to the
members of the American Medical Association the ‘ power be
hind ’ the ‘ league.’ The publisher, of the Medical Standard
and Western Druggist, for instance, has long been known as
a defender of, and mouthpiece for the ‘ patent medicine ’ and
proprietary interests. Ilis presence on the ‘ advisory board ’
is tilting, and the only surprising thing about it is that he
should have been guilty of such a tactical blunder as getting
into the tierce light of publicity.
“ That the president of the American Druggists’ Syndicate
should be on the ‘ board ’ was to be looked for, arid being
looked for, is found. And there are others! Among the lesser
satellites in this distinguished galaxy are those who very natu
rally might bo expected to enter enthusiastically into such a
campaign—the president of an antivivisection society, some
‘ mental healers ’ and one or two journalists of varying de
grees of obscurity. Of the latter, one has for years been strongly
opposed to medical organization and more recently has taken
up that mental vagary known as ‘ new thought.’ Taking into
consideration both the objects of the ‘ league ’ and the person
nel of its ‘ board’ one feels that the New York Journal ex
pressed only a half truth when it said:
“ The d ru g gists and the p ro p rie ta ry m edicin e in te re sts th ro u gh o u t the
cou n try are said to be chiefly con cern ed in d efe a tin g the Ow en hill.
“ It would have been nearer the facts if for ‘ defeating the
Owen b ill’ were substituted the clause ‘ attempting to disrupt
the American Medical Association.’ a dozen years ago the
public might not have been able to see the animus prompting this
attack; to-day it is wiser.
101098— 10132-------2
18
“ As to the publicity which this sensational and costly cam
paign will give to the American Medical Association, the medical
profession may welcome it. One thing that has long been needed
is that o f directing the attention of the laity to the aims and
accomplishments of the American Medical Association. It
welcomes investigation; the more the public learns about the
work the association is doing the better for the association. It
has nothing to be ashamed of, but it has a great deal to be proud
o f ; its work in the interests of both public welfare and scientific
medicine is and always has been open and aboveboard. The
association needs no defense; it is not only well able to stand
on its record, but is proud of that record.” (Editorial, Journal
American Medical Association.)
“ N A TIO N A L CONSERVATION CONGRESS AND A D EPARTM EN T OP H E A L T H .
“ The National Conservation Congress, recently in session in
• t. Paul adopted a platform setting forth the views of the dele
S
gates as to the duty of the Federal and State Governments in
conserving the natural and vital resources of the Nation. One
o f the planks, unanimously adopted by the committee on resolu
tions and later by the convention itself, indorsed in no uncertain
terms the establishment of a department of health. This plank
read: ‘ We also recommend that in order to make better pro
vision for preserving the health of the Nation a department of
public health be established by the National Government.’ This
declaration was adopted in spite of a large amount of carefully
stimulated (and simulated) opposition. The plank was intro
duced before the committee on resolutions by a delegate from
Pennsylvania. As soon as it was known that there -was likeli
hood of its adoption telegrams from all over the country began
to pour in on the members of the committee on resolutions,
requesting, urging, and demanding that no action be taken on
this subject. On Thursday morning, when the delegates assem
bled in the auditorium, there was found on each seat a marked
copy of the Pioneer Press containing a full-length, two-column
‘ appeal’ (otherwise known as advertising matter) from the
National League for Medical Freedom, reiterating previously
made statements regarding 4 political doctors,’ 4 medical trust,’
4 interference with liberty,’ and other stock bugbears.
But, as
a reporter for the Pioneer Press'said, 4 the delegates smiled.’
The men composing the convention, who had been sent to St.
Paul to represent the interests of the people and not the people
of the interests, who had been able to detect the cloven hoof of
monopoly under the specious plea for 4 State rights ’ which
had been made in the opening days of the convention, were not
slow to understand who and what were the influences back of
She objections to governmental action for the saving of life.
‘ The delegates smiled ’ when they received the telegrams, when
they adopted the resolution of the committee and when the
unanimous vote of the convention approved the platform. It
Ttas the sound judgment and common sense of the average
American citizen which led the delegates to realize that health
and life are important and that the only men who oppose any
Means by which life can be saved are those who have a selfish
and mercenary interest in perpetuating present conditions.”
E ditorial, Journal American Medical Association.)
1C1G98-—10132
I
*ez
19
“ wno P A T S T H E BILL",*?
“ Newspaper men are not easily misled as to motives, neither
are they slow to recognize the real forces behind an effort to
influence public sentiment. An editorial in a recent number of
the Baltimore Evening Sun shows how the better class of news
paper editors regard the strenuous and well-nigh hysterical
efforts now being made to simulate a popular uprising against
the awful iniquity of national health legislation.
“As the Sun well says, the mere statement of the arguments of
the National League for Medical Freedom is all the answer that
is necessary. But the attack on the Owen bill is only a pre
text. The American Medical Association is the real target.
The forces behind this movement are endeavoring to take ad
vantage of the popular feeling against trusts and monopolies
by branding the American Medical Association as a ‘ doctors’
trust,’ a designation, by the way, which originated with cer
tain so-called medical journals which derived their support
from nostrum vendors.
“ Evidently, the manufacturers of ‘ baby killers,’ sophisticated
and adulterated foodstuffs, cheap and bad whiskies under the
guise of ‘ family remedies,’ and fakirs and swindlers doing
business under the guise of physicians, hope that the American
public and press will accept this designation without asking for
proof or evidence, and that by such methods the American
Medical Association and its work can be discredited in the
public estimation. ‘ The delegates smiled ’ when the members
of the committee on resolutions, at the Conservation Congress
at St. Paul, were overwhelmed with a flood of telegrams care
fully arranged for beforehand, protesting against the indorse
ment of a national department of health. Truly, newspaper
editors and managers must smile with equal persistency when
‘ copy ’ is received for half-page advertisements at a daily cost
of $25,000, denouncing the national organization o f the medical
profession as a ‘ doctors’ trust.’ Newspaper men know the
cost of a general advertising campaign. They also know that
only those who are financially and mercenarily interested in
blocking the work which the American Medical Association is
doing, and who fear to have any further light thrown on their
nefarious doings, would furnish the money for such an ex
tensive and expensive advertising campaign. The National
League for Medical Freedom asks no dues of its ‘ members,’
yet it has used large quantities of the most expensive news
paper advertising space. Who pays the bills, and whence comes
all the money?
“ Certainly it does not come from the few homeopaths who
have joined the league, nor from the few eclectics, nor from the
small number of osteopaths; and surely the Christian scientists
are not shouldering this enormous burden. The obvious con
clusion is that the money comes from those exploiters o f human
weakness and credulity whose fraudulent practices have been
exposed by the American Medical Association, and whose
poeketbooks have been injured in consequence.” (Editorial,
Journal American Medical Association.)
101G 9S— 10132
o
The Commission Form of Government for Municipalities
as an Agency for the Restoration of Integrity and Efficiency
of Government and the Termination of Corruption in City,
State, and Nation, and the Overthrow of the Undue Influ
ence of Commercialism in Government.
SPEECH
OF
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
O F
O K L A H O J 1 A
IN THE
SENATE OF TIIE UNITED STATES
FRIDAY, JULY 7, 1911
W A SH IN G T O N
1911
21G5— 10188
I
SPEECH
OF
I I ON.
ROBERT
L. OWE N .
On the su b ject o f m un icip a l govern m en t.
’*iT
'
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P resident : The progressive movement in this country has
for its object the overthrow of commercialism in government
and the restoration of equality of opportunity and of the rights
of human beings in preference, where the choice must be made,
to the rights merely of property accumulation. The chief pur
pose of the progressive movement is to overthrow the chief
agency of commercialism in government, machine politics and
the rule of the minority through corrupt practices, and to re
store the rule of the majority through honest registration laws
and election laws. This is to be accomplished by the passage
of certain tried and tested statutes, including, particularly, the
initiative, the referendum, and the recall, a thoroughgoing
corrupt-practices act, complete publicity of all public business,
and including the commission form of government for munici
palities, or the short-ballot system. The commission form of
government may be properly regarded as a very important
auxiliary in the progressive movement.
The commission form of government has a national value and
a direct bearing upon the integrity of the election of Senators
and Congressmen, because it is an important agency in over
throwing corrupt machine politics in municipalities and cities.
The proportion of inhabitants living in cities, as compared to the
inhabitants of the United States, is 53.7 per cent, not counting
towns o f less than 2,500 inhabitants. I f corrupt government
CAN BE TERMINATED IN CITIES, IT CAN NOT SURVIVE IN THE STATES
t h e N a t io n .
or i n
The relative urban and suburban population of the different
States I submit as Exhibit A.
Machine politics and their centers of activity are in the cities,
and if corrupt political organization can be overthrown in cities
it will go far toward establishing integrity of government
throughout the States and throughout the Nation, as machine
politics do not easily flourish among country people who are not
so easily reached or so easily influenced by machine methods.
The commission form of government eliminates mere partisan
politics in cities, towns, and villages in the government of such
municipalities. The commission form of government usually
carries with it the initiative, referendum, and recall, giving
home government popular government, the people’s rule en
abling the citizens of each town to control the governing busi
ness in that town. It enables them, through the initiative, ref
erendum, and recall, to initiate and pass any law they do want,
including corrupt-practices prevention acts, and veto any law
21G5— 10188
3.
4
they do not want, sucli as the granting of franchises of value
without consideration, and enables them to recall inefficient or
dishonest officials.
For these reasons I have thought it worth while to call to
the attention of the Senate and of the country the importance
o f the commission form of city government as an agency in
restoring integrity of government and overthrowing the cor
ruption and inefficiency which have so seriously invaded the
governing function under color of partisan zeal.
W HAT THE
C O M M IS S IO N FORM OF C IT V GOVERNMENT I S .
The commission form of government, as usually understood,
may be illustrated with the system adopted in Des Moines,
Iowa, under the act of the general assembly of that State (Ex
hibit B) and the charter of that city (Exhibit C).
The general plan is that the citizens by primary may nomi
nate candidates for mayor and four commissioners, who shall
have complete charge of town business—legislative, executive,
and judicial. Any person can be nominated by a petition of 25
citizens. The 10 candidates having the highest vote at the pri
mary two weeks later are submitted to the citizens for an elec
tion, and the 5 candidates having the highest votes at this elec
tion comprise the city council, with full powers—legislative, ex
ecutive, and judicial. They manage the business as completely
as the board o f directors could manage the business of a bank,
There are five departments, as follows:
F irst A department of public affairs.
Second. A department of accounts and finance.
Third. A department of public safety.
Fourth. A department of streets and improvements.
Fifth. A department of parks and public property.
The mayor, by virtue of his office, has charge of the depart
ment of public affairs, with general supervision over the other
departments, and receives a salary of $3,500. The other com
missioners receive a salary of $3,000. The council, by ma
jority vote, appoints all other officials of the town— city clerk,
solicitor, tax assessor, police judge, treasurer, auditor, civil en
gineer, city physician, marshal, chief of fire department, street
commissioner, library trustees, and all other necessary officers
and assistants. These selections are made under a board of
civil service commissioners, who conduct examinations of a
practical character to determine the fitness of applicants. Each
commissioner appoints the subordinate employees in his own
department and each commissioner is held responsible for the
successful management of his department.
Extreme pains are taken to prevent fraud in the elections.
For instance, the fullest publicity is required o f campaign
funds. Both the source and the manner of expenditures are
required to be reported under oath. No officer or employee
is permitted to be interested, directly or indirectly, in any
contract with the city or in any public-service corporation, or to
accept any free service therefrom. All council meetings to
which any person not a city officer is admitted must be open to
the public.
“ All franchises or right to use the streets, highways, or public
places of the city can be granted, renewed, or extended only by
ordinance, and every franchise or grant for interurban or
2105— 10188
l
5
street railways, gas or water works, electric light or power
plants, heating plants, telegraph or telephone systems, or
public-service utilities must be authorised or approved by a
majority of the electors voting thereon at a general or special
election.
“Every motion, resolution, and ordinance of the council must
be in writing, and the vote of every member of the council, for
anti against it, must be recorded. The council is required to
print and effectively distribute each month, in pamphlet form, a
detailed, itemized statement of all receipts and expenses and a
summary of its proceedings during the preceding month. At the
end of each year the council must cause a full and complete ex
amination of all the books and accounts of the city to be made
by competent accountants and publish the report in pamphlet
form.
“ Every ordinance or resolution appropriating money or order
ing any street improvements or sewers, or making or authorizing
any contract, or granting any franchises must be complete in its
final form and remain on file with the city clerk for public in
spection at least one week before its final passage or adoption,
and must be at all times open to public inspection.” (Ham
ilton.)
Nothing is permitted to be done in secrecy or in the dark.
The public business is public.
P A R T IS A N S H IP
IN
C IT Y
B U S IN E S S
E L IM IN A T E D .
Partisanship is eliminated. No party emblems are permitted
on the ticket, but the candidates are listed in serial order, with
out party designation, and are nominated and elected as far as
possible on the ground of personal fitness. In this way partisan
ship is carefully and deliberately eliminated, as far as prac
ticable.
Ward lines are abolished in the choice of city commissioners,
so that each citizen votes for every commissioner, both in nomi
nating and in electing him.
T H E WARD SY ST E M
ABO LISH ED .
The abolition of the ward system is essential to the success
ful establishment of the commission form of government. The
ward system in the past has been peculiarly injurious to good
government because “ it perverts the political education of the
electors and encourages a local selfishness destructive of the
general and ultimately of the local interests as well. The ward
system leads to the nomination of a ward boss, who, under color
of intense zeal for that ward and under color of being a great
advocate of a political party and by petty ward politics, gets
himself elected and tries to keep himself in power by get
ting things for that ward, more than it would be equitably
entitled to and at the expense of the balance of the city. This
policy leads to unscrupulous men making combinations in
the council, trading with each other, and taking advantage
of the portions of the city whose representatives are more
scrupulous.
A city is best governed wlrese government deals with
the city as a body unit and where its general interests are
held paramount to local, private, or ward selfishness.
Citizens at large nominate men who would not be nominated
by the ward system, and thus narrow or unscrupulous men
21G5— 10188
6
are prevented from so easily entering the council. It pre
vents wards trading in the council at the expense of the
city. It prevents extravagance in wards by virtue of such
trading.
The abolition of the ward system elevates the character of
the officials of the city, and what is far more important, it
elevates the electorate of the city by making the citizens feel
that they have power to nominate and elect the entire govern
ing board of the city.
We observe in New York City recently a ward boss giving
away 7,000 pairs of shoes, apparently from pure benevolence,
but more likely for the reason that he could by this process
of commendable charity and open-hearted generosity control
7,000 votes in his ward and put himself in a position 'where he
could indirectly recoup himself with usury at the expense of
the taxpayers of that great municipality.
THE
E S S E N T IA L FEATU R ES
OF T H E
C O M M ISSIO N
FORM
OF G OVERNMENT.
The essential value and features of the commission form of
government are, roughly, as follow s:
First. Complete centralization and concentration of ail poxcer
and responsibility in a small council or commission, usually of
five members, doing away with the separation of powers into
the legislative, executive, and judicial. This is fundamental.
The commission is thus directly charged with and responsible
for the entire administration of the city’s affairs.
Second. The members of the commission must be elected at
large and not by wards, and therefore represent the city as a
whole, not by subdivisions.
Third. The members of the commission must be the only
elective officci’s of the city, and must have the power of ap
pointing all subordinate administrative officials.
Fourth. The commission must have the power of removing
subordinate administrative city officials at will.
Fifth. The commission should be subject to the initiative,
the referendum, and the recall, so that if the commission fails
to pass the laws the people do want, such laws can be passed
by the initiative petition; and so that if the commission pro
pose to pass any law the people do not want, they shall have
the right of veto by referendum petition; and so that, if a com
missioner proves to be inefficient or corrupt, his successor may
be nominated and he may be recalled by a special or general
election.
T H E P RO TEST.
A special provision of the Des Moines charter enables the
citizens to prevent the council fastening objectionable legisla
tion upon the city by a protest of 25 per cent of the number
of electors previously voting for mayor. Upon the filing of this
protest the council must either reconsider and repeal the ordi
nance objected to or submit it to a vote o f the people for accept
ance or rejection.
TH E RESU LTS.
The result of this system has been to abolish the corrupt
ward system, with its mischievous waste, inefficiency, and dis
honesty. It has eliminated partisanship, and no longer can a
ward boss appeal to his fellow citizens to stand by him as the
exponent of “ the grand old party ” of Lincoln, Grant, and
McKinley, nor can he appeal to the disciples of Thomas Jeffer2165— 10188
7
son with any better effect. His views on the tariff or currency
are not regarded as of any importance, but his relation to the
gamblers, the law-defying saloon keepers, the political jobbers,
public-service corporation and municipal contractors, and his
fitness to make a good municipal officer are closely scrutinized
by the great body of the citizens of the municipality.
The direct and undivided responsibility and the full power
placed in the hands of each commissioner obtains from him his
best efforts and the best results.
This system has reestablished popular supremacy in the
cities adopting it. There is no doubt that everything bad in
city politics is the work of the few and not of the many, and
that these few have been led by trained mercenaries, who have
paid themselves out of the publiG treasury, directly or indirectly,
for packing caucuses, padding registration lists, repeating, steal
ing or stuffing ballot boxes, perpetrating frauds in the casting
of votes, and doing the thousand and one more or less dis
reputable things which in American cities have been counted as
“ helping the party.”
The direct rule of the people has been established by the com
mission form of city government in lieu of all this. They have
under this system the right of direct nomination (selection)
and election of officials, freedom from fraud, complete publicity,
and they have the right of the initiative, referendum, protest,
and recall, compelling respect of the popular will, both affirma
tively and negatively. In this manner the people are stimu
lated in a sense of civic righteousness and power and of personal
civic responsibility. It has established the rule of the people
in town government and has dethroned the city boss and termi
nated corrupt ward and municipal partisan politics.
Of course, no city can rise higher than the level of its citizen
ship, but whatever the intelligence and conscience of the citi
zens of a town are capable of may be attained through this
improved method of governing municipalities.
Under this system the public business is conducted with effi
ciency, promptness, free from blackmail, and free from the
petty rascalities, free from the “ grand and petty larceny” that
have heretofore characterized municipal councils. A request
of the commission can be acted upon in an hour, and it is not
necessary to run the gauntlet of a corrupt house and council
of the old city legislatures, with the long delays and blackmail
incident thereto.
Under the civil service, the city employees are chosen upon a
basis of merit and actual worth and not as a reward for activ
ity in helping the ward boss to keep himself in power.
City franchises are safeguarded under this new system. It
is impossible for the council to sell a franchise by secret barter,
or to deliver such a franchise if sold, and no corrupt interest
can afford to buy or attempt to buy franchises under these
conditions, where delivery is impossible and dangerous.
The causes of corruption are removed. The temptation to
corruption is removed. Powerful safeguards against corruption
are thus established.
The plan in actual operation has shown the most remarkable
results in clean streets and alleys, improved sidewalks and pav
ing, better administration of all public utilities, and freedom
from favoritism; and justice and common sense are in control.
21G5— 10188
rr
8
In Des Moines the old “ red-light ” district, which was owned
and controlled by a social-evil trust of “ appalling cruelty,
greed, and wickedness,” was turned into a respectable neigh
borhood by the vigor and vigilance of a well-directed police
force. The city offices are filled by ruen expert and capable of
rendering high-class services. The books and records have
been brought up to date and are kept in intelligible con
dition.
I will observe here that the cities which have adopted this
method have adopted in many cases a comparative uniformity
of bookkeeping, by which the condition of various departments
and services of municipalities are able to be compared one with
another, so that a city finding a very high cost in some par
ticular line as compared with other cities in the same depart
ment or service may make an inquiry into that particular
branch of the service. In that way, by concentrating attention
on defective services, they are able to eliminate the wasteful
ness by which their accounts have been run up in that special
branch of the administration. An immense saving of money
has been made, and the people are delighted with the splendid
results of the new government.
The elections have worked admirably. “ Not for a genera
tion has so little money been spent and never have the citi
zens been able to give their attention so undividedly to the
prime issues of a municipal campaign—the honesty, capacity,
and fidelity of those seeking public place.”
The success of the Des Moines system was due to the
activity, first, of James H. Berryhill, of Des Moines, who had
business interests in Galveston and who had seen the working
of the commission government in that city. The Des Moines
Register and Leader, the News, and the Capital, of which the
Hon. Lafayette Young, our recent colleague in the Senate, was
editor, are entitled to special credit, together with the Bar
Association of the State of Iowa and the public debates which
were held in this connection. It took the most resolute effort
for several years to accomplish this result and get over the
opposition of the old machine in Des Moines and Iowa and
their influence with the legislature, but, thanks to the patriotic
and good men of that State, the legislature gave the necessary
authority.
I submit results of the commission form of government
in Galveston and Houston, Tex., Leavenworth, Ivans., Des
Moines and Cedar Rapids, Iowa, as given by Hamilton. (E x
hibit D.)
I submit also a list of over a hundred of the cities which have
adopted this plan for the last two years. (Exhibit E.)
I expressly acknowledge indebtedness to John J. Hamilton
and his excellent work on the “ Dethronement of the City Boss ”
(Funk & Wagnalls) ; to Ford H. MacGregor, Bulletin No. 423
of the University of Wisconsin; to Prof. Frank Parsons’s “ The
City of the People,” published by C. F. Taylor, 1520 Chestnut
Street, Philadelphia, Pa.; “ The Digest of Short Ballot Char
ters,” by Charles A. Beard, Ph. D., The Short Ballot Organiza
tion, 383 Fourth Avenue, New York; and Buffalo Conference
for Good City Government, Clinton Rogers Woodruff, editor.
r
H
X
y
2165— 10188
*»
9
The constitutionality of the Texas law giving municipalities
the right of recall, rendered by the civil court of appeals, I
submit as Exhibit F.
Seventy-four cities and towns in the State of New York, I
am informed by the secretary o f the Commission Government
Association of Buffalo, are considering this method, and a large
number of them have petitioned the New York Legislature for
the right of home government for cities. Up to this time, in
spite of promises, those in control of the governing business,
including the bipartisan machine men in New York State, have
denied them their just rights of local self-government, and it
■frill require a pitched battle with the forces of machine politics
to obtain this right for these cities, the chief of which is
Buffalo, with over 400,000 inhabitants.
The Short Ballot Organization, of which the Hon. Woodrow
Wilson, governor of New Jersey, is the president, has excited a
very great interest throughout the Union, and it is easily ap
plicable not only to cities, but also to counties and States, the
purpose being to concentrate the attention of the electorate upon
a few responsible men charged with the control of policies and
administrative responsibility, so that the people may give their
concentrated attention to these few officials and choose them
wisely.
It is impossible to have the people choose wisely when they
are called upon by the party bosses and party machines to vote
on 200 or 300 names at a time. Tammany Hall, for example,
has a committeeman for each 25 voters of New York City, a
committee so large that Madison Square Garden could not hold
it. Its primary ballot contains from 300 to a thousand names.
The consequence is that democracy is defeated and “ bossism ”
is enthroned.
Gov. Johnson, of California, put the matter in a nutshell in
his last annual message, when he said:
It is time we stopped scolding the voters for their inattention to the
offices at the foot of the ticket and cut the ballot down to the number
of officials that they will take the trouble to select. The job of reform
ing the voter is too big. He has a living to make and has to have some
fun as he goes along. But the job of reforming the ballot is simple.
All that is needed is to cut out the offices that have to do merely with
the routine and clerical work and call on the voter to elect only those
that control policies.
Over 200 cities and towns liave adopted some form of this
improved method of city government within the last two years,
the list submitted being incomplete and imperfect.
I submit a form of ballot used by Grand Junction, Colo.,
which is the most improved form of municipal ballot that has
yet been adopted. The Grand Junction ballot gives the first,
second, and third choice to each citizen for the members of the
city council. If there are not a sufficient number of votes of
the first choice to give a majority of the votes, then the first and
second choices are added together. I f that does not give a
majority, then the first, second, and third choices are added
together, which always results m a majority vote, so that it
requires no nomination and subsequent election. One election
is enough. At one election the public officials are both nomi
nated and elected. It is economical and it is satisfactory in
its results and operation.
2165— 10188
10
□
O f f ic ia l B a l l o t .
GENERAL M U N IC IP A L E LECTIO N , C IT Y OF GRAND JU N C T IO N ,
COLO., NOVEMBER 2, A. D. 1909.
I n s t r u c t i o n s . — To vote for any person, make a cross (X ) in ink in
the square in the appropriate column according to your choice, at the
right of the name voted for. Vote your first choice in the first column ;
vote your second choice in the second column ; vote any other choice in
the third column ; vote only one first and only one second choice. Do
not vote more than one choice for one person, as only one choice will
count for any candidate by this ballot. Omit voting for one name for
each office if more than one candidate therefor. A ll distinguishing
marks make the ballot void. If you wrongly mark, tear, or deface this
ballot, return it and obtain another.
1st
2d
3d
choice. choice. choice. Totals.
For Commissioner of Public Affairs:
D. W . A U P P E R L E ............................................
465
143
145
753
W . II. B A N N ISTE R ..........................................
603
93
43
739
N. A. LOUGH......................................................
99
231
238
568
E. B. LU TES........................................................
41
114
88
243
ED W IN M. SLOCOMB............... ....................
243
357
326
926
THOS. M. T O D D ................................................
362
293
396
1,051
No. 769.
Official ballot for election precinct No. 16, in Grand Junction, Mesa
County, Colo., Nov. 2, 1909.
H. F. V e r b e c k , City Clerk.
The following letter of Karl A. Bickel, Esq., of Grand Junc
tion, Colo., explains its working:
L
egal
D
epartm ent,
State of
I n h e r it a n c e
C olorado,
T a x D iv is io
n
.
Senator R o b e r t L. O w e n ,
Senate, Washington, D. C. .
In re sample preferential ballot, with results in one set show n:
Had the election been conducted under the old-style plan, as is com
mon in 85 per cent of American cities, Bannister, the “ old-gang ” can
didate, would have been elected.
Had it been conducted along the
cumbersome Des Moines system, the race would have been between
Aupperle and Bannister. Yet when the people had fully and accurately
expressed themselves on all the candidates and demonstrated their full
choice, it was shown that Bannister was not within the first three of
being the most desired man, and that Aupperle did not have within 196
votes of a majority of all votes cast, and that Todd was the only man
of the six who did have the support of a majority of the voters— that
is, a majority of the voters would rather have Todd elected than any
other man, although a large number of those who voted for Todd had
preferences above him. The preferential system keeps the whole people
organized to smash the organized minority and prevents minority rule.
There were not as many spoiled ballots as a result of the G. J. prefer
ential election than usual in the Australian-ballot elections.
K.
A. B
ic k e l
.
Mr. President, I have submitted this matter because I regard
it as having very great influence upon the integrity of the
Government of the United States. This method has been found
to work so well that, within the strict interpretation of what
might be called a commission form of government, there are
nearly 2 0 0 cities that have recently, within three years past,
adopted this method of governing in 27 States, and if it would not
weary the Senate I should like to call attention to some of them.
The two great cities of Alabama, for instance, Birmingham
and Montgomery.
2165— 10188
r?-
1
1
%
(
A*-
In California, Santa Cruz, Berkeley, Modesto, Oakland, San
Diego, San Luis Obispo, Vallejo, aud Monterey.
In Colorado, Colorado Springs, Grand Junction, and, I believe,
Denver now has adopted it.
Idaho, Lewiston.
Illinois, Carbondale, Decatur, Dixon, Elgin, Hillsboro, Jack
sonville, Kewanee, Moline, Ottawa, Pekin, Rochelle, Rock Island,
Springfield, Spring Valley, Waukegan, and Clinton.
Iowa, Burlington, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Des Moines, Fort
Dodge, Keokuk, Marshalltown, and Sioux City.
Kansas, Anthony, Abilene, Coffeyville, Cherryvale, Caldwell,
Council Grove, Dodge City, Emporia, Eureka, Girard, Hutchin
son, Independence, Iola, Leavenworth, Kansas City, Marion,
Newton, Neodesha, Parsons, Pittsburg, Topeka, Wichita, and
Wellington.
Kentucky, Newport.
\
Louisiana, Shreveport.
Maryland, Cumberland.
Massachusetts, Gloucester, Haverhill, Lynn, and Taunton.
Michigan, Harbor Beach, Port Huron, Pontiac, and Wyandotte,
Mississippi, Clarksdale and Hattiesburg.
Minnesota, Faribault and Mankato.
New Mexico, Roswell.
North Carolina, Greensboro, High Point, and Wilmington.
North Dakota, Bismarck, Mandan, and Minot.
Oklahoma, Ardmore, Bartlesville, Duncan, El Reno, Enid,
Miami, McAlester, Muskogee, Purcell, Sapulpa, Tulsa, Wagoner,
Guthrie, and Oklahoma City.
Oregon, Baker City.
South Carolina, Columbia.
South Dakota, Dell Rapids, Huron, Pierre, Rapid City, Sioux
Falls, Vermilion, Yankton, Aberdeen, Canton, and Chamberlain.
Tennessee, Memphis.
Texas, Aransas Pass, Austin, Beaumont, Corpus Christi,
Port Arthur, Dallas, Denison, Fort Worth, Galveston, Green
ville, Houston, Kenedy, Marble Falls, Marshall, Palestine, Port
iLavaca, and Sherman.
Utah, Salt Lake City.
Washington, Spokane and Tacoma.
West Virginia, Bluefield, Huntington, and Parkersburg.
Wisconsin, Eau Claire and Appleton.
In Texas, among the cities, I call attention to Dallas, the
largest city in the State; to Houston, Fort Worth, Galveston,
and a large number of others.
Mr. MARTINE of New Jersey. I will state in this con
nection that in New Jersey it has taken a strong hold of the
people there. The city of Trenton, the capital of our State,
lias recently ratified it. It is now being agitated in the great
city of Jersey City, in New Brunswick, Plainfield, and a number
of other cities. It is taking a strong hold upon the people of
New Jersey.
Mr. OWEN. I have thought it-proper to submit this matter
to the Senate because I think it deserves to have the attention
of the country called to it as an agency for bringing about a
restoration of honest government in this country. Our munici
palities, and especially our great municipalities, have been most
21G5— 10188
<
seriously afflicted by a partisan or bipartisan system of corrupt
politics, of which the examples are too numerous to mention
and some of them so egregious as to make it a serious humilia
tion to the American Republic. The condition which was
exposed by Francis .T Heney and Rudolph Spreckels in San
.
Francisco is' a painful exhibition of it. Ben Linsay’s disclosure
of the conditions in Denver was equally bad. The disclosures
of Joe Folk in St. Louis were just as striking and painful. In
Pittsburg, where 116 men, including a large part of the city
council, the legislative authority of that city, mercenaries who
were engaged in a wholesale conspiracy to rob that city and the
people of the city under the party and ward service in the
governing business. The conditions in Harrisburg, Pa., the
conditions in Philadelphia, in New York, in Albany, and in
Boston furnish a like painful and sorrowful record.
I wish to say that this method of governing municipalities
by the commission plan is not only adapted to villages and to
towns, but to great cities, cities as large as New York City
and Philadelphia, and the bigger the city the more efficient and
valuable becomes the principle of governing the municipality
by the commission plan, which concentrates power and makes
those who exercise it responsible directly to the people under
the initiative, referendum, and recall.
It is sufficient to call the attention of the country to the ex
pediency of this method of administering the government of
municipalities and its wonderful success where it has been
tried, and I have done so for the purpose of promoting effi
ciency and honesty of government not only in cities, but in coun
ties, States, and Nation. For it must be always remembered
that a corrupt city boss uses his city machine to levy tribute
on the county-machine managers, on the State-machine man
agers, and on the national-machine managers to demand public
offices and legislative and administrative favor for himself and
his commercial and political allies.
Mr. President, the great problem of the present time is the
restoration of equality of opportunity, so that every man, every
woman, and every child may receive and enjoy a fair return for
labor honorably and faithfully performed; so that every human
being, can have an equal opportunity to enjoy the providences
of God and the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of
happiness.
The only way that this equality of opportunity can be estab
lished is through genuine, real self-government of the people, by
the people, for the people. Under actual self-government when
the majority of the people are in power—the majority of the
people will always refuse to grant special privileges to the few
at the expense of the many ; refuse to grant to the few the
right to tax the many for the benefit of the few at the cost of
the many.
It will not do to say that the people have self-government
when in reality they are actually governed by machine politics;
when under the mechanism of party management their gov
ernors, Congressmen, and Presidents are nominated by the dele
gated delegates in State conventions of delegated delegates in
county conventions sent by ward and precinct caucuses manip
ulated by local bosses and their henchmen; where the machine
under the mechanism of party management can nominate all
21G5— 10188
13
public officials under a system which does not give to each
citizen an equal opportunity, through the mandatory direct
primary, safeguarded by law, to nominate public officers; where
there is no thoroughgoing corrupt practices act to prevent the
machine politicians from false registration, from stuffing the
ballot box or stealing the elections, through a variety of fraud
ulent practices; where there is no system by which the peo
ple can recall crooked officials or veto laws which the people
do not want, or initiate laws which the people do want, it is
perfectly obvious to the most casual observer that the people
do not rule, but are ruled by the mechanism of machine politics
under the guidance of the so-called local, county, and State
boss, because the machine is in control in a majority of States.
Of course in nominating the President or in nominating any
other important officer, as a governor of a State, the machine
will not dare to nominate a man who is incapable of standing
a campaign. But it must always be remembered that all men,
including public men, are influenced powerfully by their en
vironment and political associations and affiliations, and that
the great corporate monopolies of the country are fully aware
of those whose predilections will enable them to be subjected
to influences in the interest of big business.
It is not at all necessary to suggest that machine candidates
are of necessity dishonest or even insincere. It is sufficient
that they are subject to the domination or influence of special
interests. In this event, the people are not in reality exercis
ing the right to rule, but they are being ruled by nominees and
candidates chosen against the interests of the people, and who
would be greatly disliked by the people if the people really
understood what to expect from them.
Self-government is through two main systems; either it is
party government in combination with constitutional govern
ment or self-government solely through the constitutional form ;
that is, the direct rule of the people through constitutional
forms, without having party government.
The great political problem of the age is, How can real selfgovernment be reestablished in national affairs, and be re
established in the States and in the towns and cities wherein
as yet the people are still out of power?
The line of least resistance in reestablishing the self-govern
ment of the people is through the initiative and referendum by
questioning candidates on this issue when the candidate is seek
ing votes. The ordinary candidate will not dare to refuse his
promise to support the initiative and referendum when he is
seeking to be nominated or elected, if vigorously questioned by
organized bodies of voters. To do so is to ask the voters to
support him as a lawmaker and at the same time to deny the
people whose votes he solicits their right to initiate any law
they do want or to veto any law they do not want. Few can
didates have the hardihood to do this. No candidate can suc
ceed in it where the people are in earnest in making the
demand.
With the initiative and referendum established, so that the
people can initiate any law they do want and veto any law they
do not want, the next steps are easy—to establish a thorough
going, mandatory, direct primary, safeguarded by law, and to
establish, also, a thoroughgoing corrupt-practices act that will
2105— 10188
14
secure an honest registration law, faithfully administered, and
will guarantee likewise elections free from bribery, coercion,
and corruption. In this way self-government can be secured
for the States as States.
For villages, towns, cities, and counties the answer i s : Secure
from the legislature the right to establish a system of govern
ment in which a small number of representatives—town or
county commissioners—directly nominated, directly elected, and
subject to recall, shall be directly chosen by the people, respon
sible to the people, and who shall be both the legislators and
the executors of the public will. They will then conduct the
governing business for the people. The name of the system is
The Commission Form of Municipal Government. It may be
easily adapted-to counties and to States.
It completely establishes the self-government of the people,
and will make it thoroughly efficient and honest.
C O M M E R C IA L ISM
IN
GOVERNMENT.
Commercialism has invaded the governing function. The
administrative branches of the Government, the legislative
branches of the Government, and even the judicial departments
of Government are not free from its corrupting influence.
Commercialism has insinuated itself unfairly, unjustly, and
corruptly into the governing function in counties, in towns, in
cities, in States, and in the Nation.
Secret alliances have been entered into in innumerable coun
ties, cities, and States between various special interests and the
so-called partisan or bipartisan political machines.
These special interests have an infinite variety of forms. It
may be a gas company desiring to monopolize the gas at a
high rate in some city; it may be a traction company; it may
be a water company; it may be a municipal-contract company
dealing with the paving, sewerage, municipal buildings; -it may
be the Oil Trust, Tobacco Trust, or any of a thousand trusts
in commerce, transportation, or public utilities; it may be any
form of selfish interest or a combination of them.
It may be a combination of mere political mercenaries banded
together to put themselves in oilice, inspired not by patriotism,
not by desire to render public service, but banded together by
the “ cohesive power of public plunder.”
The main point is that these special interests use the political
machine as an agency through which they can promote their
selfish interests at the expense of the general welfare.
CORRUPT M A C H IN E P O L IT IC S M U ST BE TERM IN ATED .
It is for this reason that machine politics must be over
thrown and will be overthrown by the progressive movement,
which stands for an honest registration act, an honest election
law and secret ballot, a direct primary law, a thoroughgoing
corrupt-practices prevention act, the initiative and referendum
and recall, the commission form of government for cities, the
publicity pamphlet, a strict civil service, for direct nomination
of party delegates and of the presidential and vice presidential
candidates, and so forth. By these processes the power of the
political machine as an agency for corrupt government in the
service of the special interests against the general welfare can
be greatly abated and finally terminated.
2165— 10188
15
It sometimes happens that even a political machine is
in the hands of ambitious but upright men, who do not lose
sight of honest government and may give the people a fairly
satisfactory government, but the opportunities for corruption
of government under this system is always open to the un
scrupulous when men inspired alone by the general welfare
grow weary, inattentive, and relax their vigilance. It is a bad
system, defective, and full of pitfalls.
THE
P O L IT IC A L
M A C H IN E .
Mr. President, legitimate organization of patriotic men to
promote the policies of government in which they believe is
highly commendable and meets with my cordial and warm ap
proval. I have always been active myself in promoting and
taking personal part in what I deemed legitimate political or
ganization for patriotic purposes; but when legitimate party
organization degenerates into a corrupt and corrupting political
machine, led by mercenaries with sinister purposes, who get
possession of the machinery of political organization, under color
of intense devotion to the party service or of great zeal in
promoting party doctrines, and resort to corrupt practices, it
should be restrained and abated. When party knaves engage
in false registration of voters, registering absentees, dead men,
fictitious persons, and ghosts, and thereafter have such falsely
registered electors impersonated at the polls and falsely vote
them; when they stuff the ballot box with fictitious ballots;
when their strikers mutilate the ballots of honest men to defeat
the public w ill; when they make a false count of the registered
votes; when they make false returns o f the registered votes;
when they steal the election by corrupt practices, coercing men
who are unfortunate, poor, or dependent; when they bribe
voters by the thousand, as they did in Adams and Scioto Coun
ties, Ohio; and put unworthy allies into office and public power;
when they enter into unholy alliance with sinister commercial
interests to defeat the public will, to buy municipal councils, as
they were exposed in doing in San Francisco, in Denver, in St.
Louis, in Chicago, in Pittsburg, and in innumerable cities; when
they and their office-holding allies enter into corrupt agreements
with municipal contractors to defraud the people of the city in the
building of streets, bridges, sewers, and waterworks; when they
give away or convey for a trifling consideration valuable fran
chises belonging to the people of the cities, or the people o f the
States, or the people of the United States, through corrupt com
binations of this character; when they nominate public officials,
secretly pledged to serve special interests, by packing conven
tions in towns, cities, counties, and States; when these combina
tions nominate Members of Congress and procure the election
of Senators by bribery and corrupt methods and practices as
the servants of special interests, the time has come when an
end shall be put to it by the people of the United States and
the integrity of government be reestablished by the overthrow
of such corrupt machines whether in city, State, or Nation.
The corrupt political machine-is the chief agency through
which special interests operate in the United States. Those
desiring special privilege contribute large sums of money to
the organized machine—to the local, the city, the State, or
the national political “ boss.” They bring about the coercion
2165— 10188
16
of employees of corporations by tens of thousands for the sup
port of machine rule. They furnish the means for bribery and
corrupt practices and are paid back their investment by the
machine or the boss at public expense—by county contracts, by
municipal contracts, by laws they desire passed or laws they
desire defeated, by immunity from law, by the law’s delay,
or by the appointment of various officials who administer the
law, prosecuting attorneys, and even of judges on the bench
who will interpret the law favorably to them.
It is extremely difficult for the ordinary citizen to uncover,
expose, and punish these corrupt and corrupting processes.
Corrupting special interests will not hesitate to spend money
for the purchase of seats on the floor of the Senate and to use
other corrupt processes to unfairly Influence legislators in the
choice of Senators. When a Senator is to be elected every
available pull on the individual member of the legislature Is
taken advantage of through the ambition, the interest, the self
ishness, the weakness, or the affections and obligations of the
individual member of the general assembly. Any member of
the general assembly whose house is mortgaged, who has serious
debts he can not meet, is thus capable of being subjected to
such unfair pressure. It is for these reasons that the people of
the United States demand election of Senators by direct vote
of the people. It is for these reasons that Oregon and other
States are adopting the people’s rule system and the presi
dential-preference voting system, so that the citizens may deal
directly with the nomination of a President. It is for these
reasons that the people of this country are demanding direct
primaries, so that they can select all candidates and party
delegates, and explains the demand for the initiative and
referendum, so that they can initiate the laws they do want
and veto the laws they do not want. By the initiative sys
tem alone can they force through thoroughgoing corrupt-prac
tices prevention acts in the several States over the heads of leg
islatures controlled by corrupt machines. It is for these reasons
that the short ballot has been so widely advocated and so largely
adopted in municipalities. It is for these reasons the people
demanded improved methods of administering the business of
the House of Representatives and relieving that body from
machine methods, and it is for these reasons that a commission
form of government for municipalities is so desired and so
necessary.
E X H IB IT D.
[Pages 169 to 181, inclusive, from “ The Dethronement of the City
B o s s ” (Funk & W agnalls), by John J. Hamilton.]
R e s u l t s of t h e N e w S y s t e m -in F iv e T y p ic a l C i t i e s .1
1.
IN GALVESTON, T E X .
A board of three eminent engineers was employed and paid to devise
plans for the reconstruction of the city after the flood.
The emergency following the great storm was dealt with efficiently
by the city acting independently and also jointly with the county and
State.
The grade of the entire city was raised by the city with the assistance
of the S ta te ; a great sea wall was constructed by the county; these
improvements aggregating in cost $4,000,000.
*A majority of the cities operating under the new plan have adopted
it within the year 1909, and many of these have not yet held their first
elections under it.
21G5— 10188
IT
Annual budgets exceeding the city’s revenue by an average of about
$100,000 gave way to budgets kept strictly within the municipal reve
nues.
A floating debt of $204,974.54 was paid off out of current revenues ;
bonds to the amount of $462,000 were retired ; new bond issues were
restricted to permanent improvements; an agreement was reached with
holders of city bonds whereby the interest was reduced from 5 to 2J
per cent for a period of five years.
The city hall and the waterworks pumping station wrecked by the
flood were rebuilt.
.
,
.
The water system was extended and provision made for a duplicate
main across the bay.
Three engine houses were built and others damaged by the storm
were repaired.
The entire business section was repaved at a cost of $183,027.07.
Rock and shell roads, costing $181,064.04, were constructed.
The drainage system was extended at a cost of $245,664.47.
Old judgments to the amount of $18,026.65, inherited from former
administrations, were paid off.
City employees were paid in cash instead of in scrip subject to heavy
discounts.
City bonds quoted as low as 60 in the flood year were speedily
brought to a premium.
A modern system of bookkeeping was introduced.
Interest was collected on city balances in depositories.
A plan of preparing the annual budget and strictly adhering to it
was adopted.
The sanitation of the city was greatly improved.
The streets were kept cleaner and cleared of fruit stands and other
obstructions.
Police regulations were more strictly enforced.
Saloons were excluded from the residence districts.
The policy evil and public gambling were abolished.
The city hall was transformed from a resort for loafers into a busi
ness office.
Political influence was eliminated in selecting heads of departments
and employees; the merit system was established.
The city water service was metered.
Favoritism was done away with in all public services.
The services of men of the highest character and ability were secured
for the municipality.
Public confidence in the city government was fully restored.
The city was emancipated from the long reign of strife, dissension, and
jealousy ; harmony and general prosperity were reestablished.
Notwithstanding the enormous extension of municipal activities and
the increase of efficiency a tax rate of $1.60 for city purposes, the lowest
of any large city in Texas, was not increased.
2.
IN H O U STO N , T E X .
City indebtedness to the amount of $400,000 was retired.
< t
,
The practice of issuing bonds to cover annual deficits was discon
tinued ; expenditures were kept rigidly within the city’s income.
Current obligations were promptly m et; warrants, previously quoted
at 75 to 80, became worth par.
The city credit was completely restored, following a period when
bondholders had been threatening to sue on account of defaults.
Waterworks were purchased for $901,000 with popular approval,
showing confidence in the new government. The purchase was approved
in 1906 by a vote of three to one, whereas it had been rejected in 1903.
The water service and fire protection were greatly improved.
The street railways were required to bear their share of public bur
dens and improve the service.
Three schoolhouses were built, at a cost of $106,000.
A 15-acre park was purchased for $55,000 cash.
Dangerous old bridges across the bayou, in the heart of the city,
which the old government had refused to replace, except by bond issues,
were replaced with new bridges, paid for out of current revenues.
Twelve other bridges were put in repair.
The city plumbing work and supplies were obtained at 15 to 25 per
cent less cost by the adoption of business methods.
Good vitrified brick paving was substituted for inferior work.
A shipload of brick was imported from New York, and the brick com
bination was broken.
The cost of electric lights was reduced from $80 to $70 per arc per
year.
2165— 10188-------2
I I
18
The tax rate was reduced from $2 to $1.80.
Graft, sinecurism, favoritism, and incompetency, which permeated
every department of the old government, were done away with.
Police and sanitary regulations were strictly enforced; the fostering
of vice was discontinued.
Quarreling and dissensions disappeared ; harmony was restored both
in the city government and among citizens.
Business methods were adopted in all departments. Council sessions
became short, businesslike, and devoid of speech making.
The confidence of citizens in the integrity o f the city government was
completely restored.
Growth and prosperity of the city were stimulated by improved civic
conditions.
These good results were obtained simply from change of the system,
members of the commission having been connected with the former
government.
3.
IN
LEA V EN W O R TH , K A N S.
Strict enforcement of law was substituted for the city's traditional
policy of defiance of State prohibitory laws.
Bankruptcy and financial helplessness were succeeded by a thoroughly
satisfactory condition of the city’s finances.
Citizens of the highest standing were induced to accept ofiice under
the new regime, the politicians being driven from power by large ma
jorities.
A period of decreasing population and stagnation in business and
building was followed by one of rapid growth in all of these respects.
In 25 years under the old form of government the city paved 12
miles of streets. In the first 21 months under the new system 5 i miles
were paved.
City bonds to the amount of $20,200 were paid off in two years.
The county indebtedness for which the city was responsible was paid
off by the latter to the net amount of $119,750 within two years.
Only $27,000 of the new bonds were issued against these reductions ;
a net reduction of the bonded indebtedness of $112,950 took place, whiie
the new issues represented permanent improvements.
A new set of books was operated, and the city’s business handled
like that of “ an up-to-date mercantile establishment.”
All bills due from the city were paid before the 10th of each month.
Appointments were made on account of fitness, regardless of party
affiliations.
Property values largely increased, and the volume of real estate
transfers showed unprecedented growth of the city.
New factories were built, which give employment to 300 men. '
All of these improved conditions were brought about without in
creased taxation, despite a loss of $SO,000 a year from illegal saloon
licenses.
4.
IN
D E S M O IN E S , IO W A .
The city’s net loss in the last year of the old government was
$134,510.02 ; the net gain in the first year under the new charter was
$48,439.10, a total relative saving of $182,949.65.
The tax levy for city purposes in the last year of the old charter was
38.7 mills (on the 25 per cent valuation established by law) ; the first
year under the new charter it was 36.4 mills.
Public improvements to the value of $357,755.50 were made during
the first year under the new system.
Contractors were held strictly to the specifications, and claims for
extras, which had grown into a crying abuse, were firmly rejected; the
quality of all public work visibly improved.
Several carloads of inferior creosote paving blocks were rejected.
A modern bookkeeping system was installed.
Municipal expenditures were held strictly within the city’s revenues,
ending the practice of piling up yearly deficits, to which almost the
entire city bonded debt was due.
Numerous leaks were stopped ; all the licenses collected were turned
into the treasury.
Street lights, formerly costing $75 to $95, were reduced to a uniform
rate of $65 per arc per year, and the moonlight schedule abolished, in
suring better service.
Incandescent lights were reduced from $24 to $17 in some cases
and the all-night schedule was substituted for a moonlight schedule in
others, at the same price, $17.
All public work was promptly don e; complaints were given immediate
attention.
The streets were kept noticeably cleaner; the alleys in business sec
tions, never before cleaned at all, were now thoroughly cleaned.
2165— 10188
19
Street signs were put up throughout the city, years of clamor for it
having failed to induce the old government to make this Improvement.
The wages of men with teams were Increased from $3.50 to $ 4 .5 0 ;
those of day laborers from $2 to $ 2 .2 5 ; much better service was
required.
The quality of public service in all departments was noticeably
bettered.
The cost of cleaning catch basins was reduced from $1.40 to $1.12.
Uniform cement walks were laid throughout the business section.
Bridge paving under the old system cost $4.74 per yard by contract;
under the new system it was done by day labor for $4.09.
Culverts costing $17.61 per cubic yard under the old plan were built
for $12.63 under the new.
Mowing in the parks was done at 75 per cent of the old cost.
Work done by contract was let to the lowest bidders, without
manipulation.
The “ red-light ” district, operated under the corrupt and unlawful
monthly fining system, was entirely abolished.
Bond sharks, who owned the segregated “ red-light ” district and
oppressed the inmates of disorderly houses, were driven from business.
Public gambling houses, previously operated under police protection,
were closed.
Petty gambling devices, such as slot machines, formerly protected,
were effectually prohibited.
Ordinances regulating saloons were strictly and uniformly enforced.
Friendly, but mutually self-respecting, relations between the city
government and public-service corporations were established.
City politics were entirely divorced from State and national politics.
Private enterprise and public spirit were remarkably stimulated.
Over $400,000 was raised for public purposes by citizens'in two years.?
A great coliseum, new Y . M. C. A. and Y . W . C. A. buildings were
provided, etc.
The city, formerly notorious for “ divisive strife.” became notably
harmonious.
The confidence of citizens in the representative character of the city
government was fully reestablished.
Following is a comparative statement of working funds in Des
Moines in 1907 and 1908 :
Cash on hand Apr. 1, 1907_____ $70, 396. 63
Claims outstanding______________
55, 085. 83
Excess cash over claims_______________ $15, 310. 80
Cash on hand Apr. 1, 1908____
$72, 790. 11
Claims outstanding______________
191, 989. 93
Excess claims over cash_______________ 119, 199. 82
Loss, 1907 (last year under old charter)___________________ $ 1 3 4 ,5 1 0 .6 2
Claims outstanding Apr. 1, 1 9 0 8 - $181, 989. 93
Claims paid by bond issue____
1 7 5 ,6 1 6 .0 7
Claims that were not paid by bond issue_____
Cash on hand Apr. 1, 1908____________________
16, 373. 86
72, 790. 11
Excess cash over claims that were
not paid by bond issue--------------------Cash on hand Apr. 1, 1909------- $164, 352. 05
Claims outstanding----------------------59, 496. 77
56, 416. 25
Excess cash over claims-----------------------
104, 855. 28
Gain, 1908 (first year under new charter)--------------------------
4 8 ,4 3 9 .0 3
Gain, 1908 over 1907----------------------------------------------------
182, 949. 65
5.
IN CEDAR R A P ID S, IO W A.
Bonds were retired and interest paid thereon amounting to a total
of $61,980.
Extensive park improvements were made.
Additional park property was acquired.
A new fire station was erected. All city buildings were put in good
repair.
The island in Cedar River, formerly a dumping ground, was pur
chased by the city and turned into a beautiful civic center.
The services of Charles. Mulford Robinson, the civic improvement
expert, were secured, and, following his advice, streets were extended,
street signs were erected, waste paper receptacles provided, etc.
2165— 10188
20
Tublic works of all kinds were done on a large scale, and well done.
The receipts from the police court increased from $75 to $700 per
month without an increase of arrests.
License taxes were impartially collected.
Milk and meat inspection laws were enforced.
Five patrolmen were added to the city police force.
Gamblers were driven from the city.
The social evil was segregated and put under severe restrictions.
Defective paving was rejected; contractors were held to the specifica
tions.
—jW»
Cash discount was taken on all city bills.
Interest was collected on city balances in banks.
The city's credit was established at the highest standard.
Business methods were introduced in all departments of the city
government.
Complaints from citizens were given immediate attention. Civic
pride was awakened.
The growth of the city was largely accelerated.
For the following exhibits see Congressional R ecord of July
1 3 ,19 1 1 :
Exhibit A.— Census Office report of city and county popula
tion ;
Exhibit B.—The Iowa law;
Exhibit C.—Ordinance under which the first administration of
Des Moines, Iowa, was organized;
Exhibit E.—List of cities having commission form of govern
ment in some form ; and
Exhibit F.— “ Texas recall upheld by higher court; ” “ Dallas
City Charter held to be valid.” Text of opinion.
2105— 10188
o
®
s
x
b
“ The control of transportation, the control of industrial
monopolies, the stability of com m erce by the protection of
bank deposits, are fundamental economic questions urgently
demanding im m ediate consideration and early settlem en t.”
SPEECH
N. ROBERT L. OWEN
O F
O K L A H O M A
IN
THE
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
MONDAY, JULY 24, 1911
Supporting the proposal of an im mediate program com
m itting the Senate to a suitable act for physical valuation
of railroads, for the control of industrial m onopolies and
security of bank deposits, and low ering the steel and iron
schedule.
W ASH IN G TO N
3277— 10213
Jr
1911
SPEECH
O
F
I I O N . EO B E E T
L. O W E N
The Senate having under consideration Senate resolution _No. 109,
providing for the physical valuation of railroads engaged in interstate
commerce, and so forth—
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P k e s id e n t : I wish to give my approval to the purpose
of the resolution of the Senator from Nevada [Mr. N e w l a N d s ]
and to the resolution itself as amended. I go somewhat fur
ther than the Senator from Nevada, perhaps, believing, as I
do, that the personal convenience of Senators and of the Mem
bers of the House of Representatives should not be weighed
too heavily in comparison with the duties they have to perform
and the services which they might now render to the people of
the United States by continuous active work in giving the coun
try relief from monopoly. I should much prefer that there
should be no adjournment at all, but that Congress should pro
ceed with the business of legislating for the relief of the peo
ple of this country. In order to do that efficiently, I think the
Senate ought to lay down a program by which they shall be
guided; and the consideration of the questions proposed by the
Senator from Nevada is certainly of the first magnitude.
For 40 years this country has been trying to arrive at reason
able freight and passenger rates. For a long period of time the
Interstate Commerce Commission, charged with the duty of
studying this question, have year after jmar recommended to
Congress the necessity for the physical valuation o f railroads
as a necessary basis upon which to determine what is a reason
able freight rate and a reasonable charge for passenger service.
It has been 5 or 6 years since the honorable Senator from Wis
consin [Mr. L a F ollette], in a magnificent speech, pointed out
the sound reasons and urgent need for such legislation as this.
Why is it that the representatives of the people of the United
States in the Senate sit still and refuse the most obvious relief
necessary to the adjustment of this question? I do not under
stand why the Senate of the United States not only will not
pass legislation which is essential and which has been re
peatedly declared over and over again by the Interstate Com
merce Commission as necessary in order to arrive at a fair
freight rate, but I do not understand why the Senate sits in its
place, gives no response, and will not even now, in all human
probability, declare in favor of the program of considering the
physical valuation of the railroads.
At present the Interstate Commerce Commission are com
pelled to compare the rates of one road with the rates of another
road in order to determine whether the rate in either case is
reasonable, although both rates are grossly excessive that are
compared with each other; but-in no case have they a definite,
reliable foundation. You must know what the physical valua
tion of the property is, what the amount of freight carried is,
what the earning power is, in order to determine as a rational
proposition what is a fair and just rate; and if you do not give
the opportunity for the Interstate Commerce Commission to
3277—10213
3
4
determine by tlie physical valuation and the volume of freight
what a fair rate is, in effect you deny the people of this coun
try the relief from the transportation monopolies that have so
long dominated not only the commerce but the governing func
tion itself. Their influence upon this body has made it a bul
wark of special privilege, and it ought not to be so any longer.
The time has come for plain speech, and I hope my speech is
not misunderstood on this question. The Senator from Wiscon
sin seemed to stand alone six years ago, but he has support
now.
Here is a proposal from the Senator from Nevada, asking the
Senate to consider what it will do—whether it will or whether
it will not proceed to the settlement of these most important
questions of railway and industrial monopoly. I am heartily in
favor of the resolution, and I hope a majority of Senators are
in favor of it.
Equally important as the physical valuation of railroad prop
erties, if not more important, is the regulation of industrial
monopolies which control all the manufactured goods in this
country, whether they be fabrics, whether they be textiles,
whether they be woolen goods or cotton goods or silk goods, or
whether they be goods of iron and steel and brass and copper,
whether they be materials for clothing men or for sheltering
men or building materials. All of these things and all manu
factured articles and many food products are controlled by in
dustrial monopolies, which are taking from the people of this
country a very large and unfair part of the proceeds of their
labor by superior commercial craft, by the restraint of compe
tition, by monopoly artfully established throughout this Union.
The time has come to consider the termination of these cruel
wrongs. Will the Senate agree to it or will they refuse?
The Senator from Nevada proposes that the Senate shall
proceed to the consideration of these vital questions and their
solution. What are you going to do about it? Nothing. Sit
still, let no vote be taken, or vote “ no.” There ought to be a
record vote upon this proposal.
Then there is the consideration of the lowering of the steel
schedule proposed by the amendment of the Senator from Texas
[Mr. Culberson], and provision for the reform of the banking
laws, with a view to the security of bank depositors and the
prevention of bank panics. That is a matter of easy solution,
a matter which several years ago I urged vigorously upon the
floor of the Senate. There is no reason why there should not be
established a mutual insurance plan for the protection of de
positors. It will cost the banks nothing; it will benefit the con
tributing banks; it will give greater stability to the banking
fraternity; it will give a greater volume of credit, and promote
the commerce of this country and promote our prosperity. Why
should the Senate not consider this question?
The control of transportation, the control of industrial
monopoly, the stability of commerce by the protection of bank
deposits are fundamental economic questions, and urgently
demand immediate consideration and early settlement.
I am in favor of this resolution, and I am in favor of the
Senate of the United States staying in continuous session until
they have offered the country a satisfactory solution of all
of these questions.
3277— 10213
o
/
Election and Recall of Federal Judges.
ABSTKACT
.
V
OF
HON. R O B E R T
)
SPEECH
OF
L. 0 ¥ E N g
Monday, July SI, 1911.
[Congressional Record, p. 3687.]
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, I am moved to offer this bill for
the election and recall of Federal judges, and to discuss it, in
connection with the Arizona constitution.
The people of that State propose the right to elect and recall
all officials, including judges, by a vote of the electorate.
,
A BST RA CT OF ARGUMENT.
n
a
I shall endeavor to show the justification of the right of
election and recall of judges—■
First. By precedents, showing that many States do elect their
judges and that all of the 46 States do have the explicit right
to recall their judges by the legislature, or automatically recall
by a short or fixed tenure of office.
Second. That the election and recall of judges is justified by
sound reason and common sense.
Third. That the recall of judges is justified in a peculiar
sense in this Republic at this time, for the reasons—first, the
Federal courts have unlawfully assumed the right to declare
acts o f Congress unconstitutional; second, have undertaken to
invade the legislative function of Congress by judicial legisla
tion ; third, have overridden the rights of State laws in a similar
manner, either on the charge that such State laws were uncon
stitutional or that such State laws were invalid on grounds of
policy; fourth, such courts have become tyrannical by denying
jury trial in contempt cases, inconsiderate in injunction cases,
and so forth, and that the reason of this bad behavior is due to
the fact that the judiciary is not responsible to the people either
by election or recall.
The election and recall of Federal judges would abate the
present jealousy felt by the States against the Federal Govern
ment and bring into harmonious relation the States and Nation.
I shall examine the argument of judicial infallibility and
answer it.
I shall endeavor to show that the Constitution of the United
States abundantly justifies Congress to follow the example of
the States and provide both the election and the recall of
Federal judges.
I shall endeavor to show that the time has come when the
liberties of the American people require the exercise of this con
stitutional power, or if it be deemed unconstitutional by Con
gress, then that Congress should submit an amendment to the
Constitution to provide for this and other relief by establishing
an easy means of amending the Constitution.
T H E ARGUM ENT.
'
*
Mr. President, the bill which I now submit proposes to put
the recall of Federal judges in the hands of the Congress of
the United States, while the Arizona constitution proposes to
7197— 10319
2
put the recall of .judges in the hands of the electorate of that
State. They are the sovereign power, they are the governing
power, and if the court has a bias against the interest of the
people and the people wish to recall for that purpose that bias
need not be named as a ground for such action. It need not be
mentioned. No reason is necessary to be assigned why the sov
ereign power of the people of this country should be exercised
in recalling any public servant. It has a right to be exercised
without assigning reasons.
To assign reasons is to discredit the incumbent, while re
moval without assignment of reasons is the mildest method of
dealing with a public servant whose service is no longer desired.
And self-governing people should govern themselves without
apology or need to assign reasons in the exercise of the right of
self-government. The mere fact that the people do not like a
judge and do not desire him to serve them justifies recall. He
has no function, no public office, or public dignity except as it is
bestowed upon him by the people themselves, yet the Tory argu
ment is constantly advanced—that judges ought not to be re
called, that they ought to be independent of the people, that they
ought to have office for life whether their service is acceptable
to the people or not. There is no sound sense and no good reason
in this contention, and it impairs the right o f self-government
and liberties of a free people. Such a policy can only result in
a judicial oligarchy.
THE
T E O rL E
ARE
C O N S E R V A T IV E .
It will be contended by some that the recall of judges might
safely be left to the National Legislature or to the State legis
latures, but should not be left to the electorate, because the
electorate would not be so conservative in the exercise of the
power to recall a judge as their representatives in the legis
lature.
The answer to this is that the electorate of an American State
and of any of the American States is abundantly conservative
and moves very slowly, more slowly than their progressive rep
resentatives would move.
A political party is controlled by caucus and in convention,
and is easily moved by passion or impulse. The people in their
peaceful homes or in the quiet seclusion of a voting booth are
not so easily moved.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
The reactionary argument that the people are turbulent, un
duly excitable, that they are wild and visionary, that they are
unduly passionate, that they comprise an irresponsible mob
unworthy to be trusted with power, conies with poor grace from
those who hold their honors, their dignities, and their salaries
from these same people.
The long-suffering patience of the people is best evidenced by
the forbearance with which the people permit men in public
service to give currency and approval to these unfounded and
absurd criticisms of the great American electorate.
IF
PBOPLE
ARE IN T E L L IG E N T
WHY
ARE
JU D G E S?
THEY
NOT
ENOUGH
IN T E L L IG E N T
TO ELECT
ENOUGH
AND RECALL
TO
ELECT
SEN ATORS,
AND
RECALL
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Every Member of Congress is elected by direct vote of the
people. Have the people intelligence enough to elect Senators
7107— 10319
3
and Members of the House, and yet do they lack intelligence to
elect or to recall a judge? Would they recall a Senator or a
Member of the House who performed his duty faithfully and
truly represented his constituency?
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
THE
C H IE F VALUE OF T H E RECALL W IL L BE FOUND IN M A K IN G IT S USE
U N NECESSARY.
Mr. President, the chief value of the recall will not be the
exercise of this power in actually recalling judges, but the con
trary. If the power of recall exists, the conduct of judges will
be so exemplary, so satisfactory to the people of the United
States, that no recall of any Federal judge would ever be
necessary. The moment the recall went into effect the courts
would promptly discontinue their unauthorized, unconstitu
tional, and grossly improper conduct of declaring an act of
Congress unconstitutional. The Federal courts would no
longer, because of their views of public policy, amend acts of
Congress by inserting words in important statutes which Con
gress had refused to insert, as the Supreme Court, in substance,
did in its opinion in the Standard Oil case and in the Tobacco
Trust case. The courts would no longer deal with undue se
verity in contempt cases, and government by injunction would
cease. The right of recall and the power of recall would make
the recall itself unnecessary.
PRECEDENTS---- N EARLY A L L T H E STATES DO ELECT T H E IR JUDGES.
Mr. President, when our Federal Constitution was adopted in
1787 none of the judges were elected by the people, although
there was a greatly restricted suffrage; but since that time,
although the suffrage has been greatly enlarged, so that we
have almost universal manhood suffrage and in five States
woman’s suffrage, yet with the growth of modern Democracy
or progressive Republicanism very many of the States have
adopted the doctrine of electing judges and giving them fixed
terms of office. For example:
(Here follow provisions for electing or appointing judges in
the 4G States.)
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
It will thus be seen that 36 States elect the judges by popu
lar vote; Connecticut, Georgia, Rhode Island, Vermont, and
Virginia elect by the general assembly; and Delaware, Maine,
Mississippi, New Hampshire, and New Jersey appoint. All of
the States have the recall by fixed tenure, except Massachu
setts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, all of which recall by
the legislature. Thirty-two o f the States provide by constitu
tion for recall of judges by the legislature.
It is therefore substantially the unanimous opinion of all the
States that judges should hold by fixed tenure and be subject
to the automatic recall of short terms or by resolution of the
legislature.
When the Constitution of the United States was adopted, in
many States the legislatures directly elected the judiciary, as
in Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Delaware, New Jersey,
Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia, and they exercised con
trol over the judges by fixing their term o f office “ during good
behavior,” as was done in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New
York, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia,
7197— 10319
4
and by a short tennre o f office o f one year, a s in Rhode Island,
Connecticut, and Georgia, and by the right of recall by an ad
dress o f the legislature, a s in M assachusetts, New H am pshire,
M aryland, D elaw are, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania.
THE
RECALL OP JUD G ES BY ST A T E S .
'■
M any of the States have exercised and now exercise the right
o f recall of the ju d iciary by the address of the legislatures. F or
e x a m p le :
(H ere follow provisions governing the recall in 32 States.)
*
*
*
*
*
#
*
In m any o f the States— A labam a, D elaw are, Florida, K en
tucky, Louisiana, M ichigan, M ississippi, Nevada, Pennsylvania,
South Carolina, T exas, and so forth—-the language is nsed in
the constitution that where the offense charged is not sufficient
ground for impeachm ent that judges m ay be recalled or re
moved by address o f the legislature.
v
IM P E A C H M E N T IS M ERELY A FORM OF RECALL.
I t is not denied that judges should be impeached when guilty
of high crimes.
A ll the State constitutions, and the United
States Constitution also, provides for this, and it is justified by
reason. B u t impeachment is fa r more serious than recall. Im
peachments involve the conviction for crim inal conduct. The
recall is a much more benign remedy, and can be invoked where
the fa u lt of the judge or the reason for rem oval is not so great
as in the case of impeachm ent and m ay be Invoked w ith honor
to the judge who h as become infirm and who m ay for his own
good be retired on a pension. A ll of the States provide for
recalling judges by impeachment, but this recall carries dis
grace.
T H E SH O RT TENURE OF O FFICE OF A JUDGE IS A FORM OF RECALL.
M r. President, the short tenure o f office is a form o f recall, by
virtue o f which the people who elect judges or have them elected
by the legislature, or appointed by the governor, prevent them
from becoming a judicial oligarchy, prevent them from becom
ing tyrannical, and prevent them from becoming judicial rulers
or indulging any unseemly exercise o f power by recalling them
w ith a short tenure of office.
A s I pointed out, three of the States when the Constitution
w as fram ed elected judges only fo r 12 months. It is w onderful,
when a careful exam ination is made, to see how universally the
people of this country have provided against judicial oligarchy
in the S tates by a fixed tenure of office.
I call attention to
this record, giving all of the States in order, the number of
years for w hich the higher State judges are elected, and how
elected or appointed, and the number o f these States which at
the sam e tim e, in addition to the short tenure, exercise the right
of recall directly through the legislature.
T h irty-fou r of the States elect judges by the qualified electors,
six others elect judges by the general assembly, and only six
States appoint by the governor and council. Forty-three States
exercise autom atic recall by the fixed or short tenure o f office
and 32 States recall directly by the legislatu re; and no State
fa ils to have the right o f recall either by the short or fixed
tenure or by tbe legislature.
7197— 10319
TENURE OF O FF IC E OF STATE JUDGES. ETC.
' Alabama, 5 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified electors
of State.
Arkansas, 8 years. Elected by qualified electors of State.
California, 12 years. Recall by people’s vote (pending). Elected by
qualified electors of State.
Colorado, 9 years. Elected by qualified electors of State.
Connecticut, 8 years.
Recall by legislature. Appointed by general
assembly.
Delaware, 12 years. Recall by legislature. Appointed by governor.
Florida, G years. Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified electors
of State.
,,
Georgia. 6 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by general assembly.
Idaho, 6 years. Elected by qualified electors of State.
Illinois, 9 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by electors of each
district.
Indiana, 6 years. Recall as by law. Elected by electors of State at
large.
Iowa, 6 years. Elected by qualified electors of State.
Kansas, 6 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified electors
of State.
Kentucky, 8 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by districts.
Louisiana, 12 years. Recall by legislature.
Elected by electors of
State.
Maine, 7 years.
Recall by legislature. Appointed by governor.
Maryland, 15 years.
Recall by legislature.
Elected by electors of
districts.
Massachusetts, during good behavior.
Recall by legislature.
Ap
pointed by governor.
Michigan, 8 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by electors of State.
Minnesota, G years. Elected by electors of State.
Mississippi, 9 years. Recall by legislature. Appointed by governor.
Missouri, 10 years.
Recall by legislature.
Elected by electors of
State.
Montana, 6 years. Elected by electors of State at large.
Nebraska, 6 years. Elected by electors of State at large.
Nevada, 6 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified electors
of State.
New Hampshire, during good behavior.
Recall by legislature. Ap
pointed by governor and council.
New Jersey, 7 years. Appointed by governor.
New York, 14 years.
Recall by legislature. Elected by electors of
judicial districts.
North Carolina, 8 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified
voters of Si ate.
North Dakota, 6 years. Elected by qualified voters of State.
Ohio, 5 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by electors of the State
at large.
Oklahoma, 6 years. Elected by electors of judicial districts.
Oregon, 6 years. Recall by people's vote. Elected by qualified electors
of State.
Pennsylvania, 21 years.
Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified
electors of State.
Rhode Island, subject to resolution of general assembly. Recall by
legislature. Elected by the two houses in grand committee.
South, Carolina, 8 years.
Recall by legislature.
Elected by joint
assembly.
South Dakota, G years. Elected from districts by electors of State at
laTge.
Tennessee, 8 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified voters
of the State.
Texas, 6 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified voters of
the State.
Utah, G years. Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified voters of
the State.
Vermont, 2 years. Elected by senate and house of representatives in
joint assembly.
Virginia, 12 years.
Recall by legislature.
Elected by general as
sembly.
Washington, G years. Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified elec
tors of State at large.
West Virginia, 12 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by voters of
State.
Wisconsin, 10 years. Recall by legislature. Elected by qualified elec
tors of State.
Wyoming, 8 years. Elected by qualified voters of the State.
7197— 10319
6
It w ill th u s be seen that all o f the S tates have an autom atic
recall of ju d ges by a short tenure o f office, excepting Rhode
Island, N ew H am pshire, and M assachusetts, all three of which
expressly provide in their constitutions for the recall o f judges
by the legislature.
N ew H am pshire has recalled her judges four tim es, and, I
understand, on grounds o f policy. Rhode Island recalled her
judiciary— by dropping them a t the end o f the short tenure—
which declared an act o f the Rhode Island Legislature uncon
stitutional,
I insist that the recall o f ju dges by the voters of a State,
in the seclusion o f the ballot box, is more conservative than to
remove ju d ges by caucus in a legislature, where passion or in
terest m igh t affect the judgm ent. The people of A rizona can
be relied upon to deal ju stly w ith this question, and their right
o f self-government in this particular can not be ju stly denied.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
TI1E E LECTIO N AND RECALL OF JUDGES TS J U S T IF IE D EX EVERY P R IN C IP L E
OF SELF-G OV ERN M EN T.
T h e election and recall o f judges, w hich I have shown thus to
prevail in all of the States of the Union, has been adopted by
the various States after discussion and consideration by the
best people in the United States, and their action in regard to
th is m atter is justified by sound reason and common sense.
Since the establishment o f common schools, of high schools, of
university privileges— since the establishment of the m odem
newspapers which penetrate every nook and cranny of the
land— since the growth o f universal intelligence— w hy should
not the A m erican people elect judges who are to serve them on
the bench? I f citizens have a civil dispute, do they not n atu
rally arbitrate their differences and choose their own arbiters?
And if they are satisfied, who should com plain?
I f citizens o f a village w ish to choose their own justice o f the
peace, w hy should they not have the right to elect such an
official? I f the citizens of a county desire to elect the county
judge, w hat sensible reason can be assigned that those whose
lives and property are subject to the jurisdiction should not
elect the citizen who is a candidate for county judge? D o they
not pay him his sala ry? A re they not self-governing people?
A re they not entitled to the unqualified rights of self-govern
ment recognized in the D eclaration of Independence and in the
various bills of rights in the several States? Or have we fo r
gotten the source of authority in this country, and that it
springs from the people and does not descend to the people from,
a governing class? I t seems to be necessary, M r. President, to
recall to the Congress o f the United States and to the country
the principles laid down by the Declaration of Independence,
in which it w as set forth that the right to govern came from
the people and not from the king.
A
J U D IC IA L O LIG ARC H Y, OR J U D IC IA L RU LERS, INDEPEN DENT OF T H E
PEO PLE, NOT C O N SIST E N T W IT H L IB E R T Y AND SELF-G OVERN M EN T AS
SET F O R TH IN D ECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE AND B IL L S OF R IG H T S ----T H E PEO PLE ARE SOVEREIGN, NOT T H E J U D IC IA R Y ---- T H E SOVEREIGN
POW ER IN T H E PEOPLE M U ST BE E X E R C ISE D FOR T H E W ELFARE OF T H E
PEOPLE.
“ The U nanim ous Declaration o f the Thirteen U nited States
o f A m erica,” issued July 4, 1776, sa id :
W e hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created
eq u al; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable
T1S7— 10319
7
rig h ts; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that when
ever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends it is the
right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new govern
ment, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers
in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and
happiness.
T h is declaration is a declaration in effect that all powers of
government emanate directly from the people. A nd this right
is reiterated in the constitutions of alm ost every State in the
Union, declaring in various form s that all powers of govern
m ent spring directly from the people. For exam p le:
(H ere follow excerpts from 46 State constitutions, showing
all political power to be in the hands o f the people.)
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
M r. President, undoubtedly all governing powers spring from
the people, and this fundam ental fact is recognized universally.
One o f the most im portant o f the governing powers is the right
to elect judges and to recall them when they cease to be satis
factory to the people for any reason whatever, o r iv ith o u t a n y
re a so n iv h a tc v e r . T h e p e o p le a re n o t ca lled u p on to a ssig n a n y
re a so n in e x e r c is in g th is rig h t o f s e lf-g o v e r n m e n t.
IF
JUD G ES SHOU LD BE APPOIN TE D FOE L IF E , W H Y NOT H AVE SENATORS
AND CO NG RESSM EN APPOIN TE D BY T H E PRESID ENT FOR L I F E ?
I f judges for life, w hy not Senators and Congressmen for life?
W h y not prosecuting attorneys for life ? W h y not a President
for life ? W ou ld it not make them more in d e p e n d e n t o f “ popu
la r cla m o r ” ? W ou ld it not thus enable them to be free from
the influence of the p r e ju d ic e s , p a ssio n s, and im m a tu r e v i e w s of
the v u lg a r p o p u la c e ?
W ou ld they not, under such favorable
conditions, make better ru le rs o f the people?
But, M r. President, it is not ru le rs o f th e v u lg a r p o p u la ce we
seek. W e demand p u b lic s e r v a n ts , not r u le rs , and we wish these
servants to respect the w ill of the people, and not despise the
people, or view them as a “ vulgar populace.” L et us hear no
more o f “ p o p u la r c l a m o r of the “ tu rb u len c e o f th e d em o c
ra cy
o f the “ v u lg a r p o p u la ce .” The people have more w is
dom, more dignity, and more justice than those ,of their paid
servants who indulge such sentiments or voice such views. No
man has the right to hold public office and thus offend the con
fidence of those who trust him w ith their powers and dignities.
T H E R IG H T OF RECALL OF JUDGES IS J U S T IF IE D BY REASON AND COMMON
SEN SE AS W ELL AS BY PRECEDENT.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
W h y should anyone contend that a judge who for any reason
is incapacitated to properly serve the people should not be re
called, except by impeachm ent?
*
*
*
*
. *
*
*
Should a judge who becomes imbecile, weak of intellect, or a
neurotic, retain power to pass upon the life and property of
citizens, upon the liberty of citizens, w ithout the possibility of
recall except by impeachm ent? Impeachment is too severe in
such a case. The recall m ay be* applied with honor.
Such a
judge having been faith fu l might well be recalled and placed
upon a pension roll by virtue of his past services.
*
*
7197— 10319
*
*
*
*
*
8
Shall a judge w ho is a victim o f paresis or of a permanent
m alignant disease continue to w ear the ermine and oppress those
w ho have honored him, and they have no rem edy? Shall his
incompetency, his unfitness, his inefficiency have no remedy ex
cept by im peachm ent? The recall is a much m ilder system than
impeachment. It operates benignly, and m ay remove a jndge
who becomes infirm, disabled, or inefficient, w ithout disgrace,
and it may be exercised w ith honor to the judge.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
M r. President, a judge upon the bench is only a human being
after all, and he m ight become intemperate, not sufficiently to
ju stify impeachment, perhaps, bift sufficiently to ju stify recall.
H e might become mentally incapable or physically incapable,
not sufficiently, perhaps, to ju stify impeachment, but quite suffi
ciently to ju s tify recall for the benefit of the service.
Such a ju dge might become corrupt and be so skillful in his
corrupt judgm ents that it w ould be impossible to im peach; and
yet the wisdom of his removal by recall might be beyond d ou bt
*
*
*
*
M r. President, there are many degrees of m alfeasance and of
m isfeasance ju stifyin g recall which w ould not ju stify impeach
ment. M r. President, a judge upon the bench is merely a law yer
employed by the people, at a sala ry, to interpret the law . H e
does so in the light of his environment, influenced by his educa
tion, by his previous political and judicial predilections, influ
enced by his long practice at the bar. Perhaps he m ay have
been the valued attorney of various powerful corporations,
whom he has long served and whose interest in him has led to
his preferment on the bench by the skilled influences of commer
cial interests brought to bear upon llie appointing power. Sup
pose such a judge in a series of decisions uniform ly decided
cases against the interests of the people, whose servant he had
become, and uniform ly decided such cases in favor of special
privilege, whose paid servant he form erly was. Should the
people have no right to recall him except by impeachm ent?
Such a judge may be perfectly conscientious; but will that
suffice to ju stify his continuance in office under such circum
stances?
M r. President, the right of recall of judges is all the more
important when wr recognize the fa c t that the big interests of
e
this country have taken infinite pains to bring about the nomi
nation and promotion as Federal judges of those whose opinions
and bias of mind w ere known to be favorable to their point of
view'.
W henever a vacancy occurs on the Federal bench, immediately
the most lively and active pressure is brought to bear by vari
ous business interests in favor, of candidates desired by them,
and I pause to remark that it is quite im m aterial whether such
candidate has previously been regarded as a Dem ocrat or as a
Republican.
I do not mean to suggest that candidates thus urged are in
any degree dishonest or corrupt, although that is alw ays a pos
s ib ility ; but I do mean to s * y that they are merely human
beings.
T h at such candidates have been practicing law yers,
some good law yers and some not so good, gives them no divine
unction of infallibility.
T h at they are influenced and con7197— 10319
9
trolled in their opinions by their education and their environ
ment and by the argum ents which they have previously been
engaged in m aking is absolutely certain.
I do mean to say
that corporate interests do seek to place upon the Federal bench
and in the State courts those candidates who are known to
favor the point of view of the special interests as against the
interests of the people, and that I do believe such appointments
on the Federal bench are the rule and not the exception.
A short time ago I had the honor of calling the attention of
the Senate to an illum inating instance of how judges appointed
to discharge the most important work are influenced by their
previous environment. T h is w as illustrated by the record of
the Electoral Commission of 1S77, appointed to determine who
should be President o f the United States— whether Mr. Tilden,
of New Y ork, or M r. H a yes, o f Ohio.
T h at commission w as composed of five Justices of the Supreme
Court of the United S tates— Hon. Joseph P. Bradley, Hon.
N athan Clifford, Hon. Samuel F. M iller, Hon. Stephen J. Field,
and H on. W . S tron g; five distinguished United States Sena
tors— Edm unds, M orton, Frelinghuysen, Thurm an, and B a y a r d ;
and five great leaders of the H ouse of Representatives— Mr.
Payne, M r. Hunton, M r. Abbott, Mr. Garfield, and Mr. Hoar.
T h is distinguished commission passed upon four contestedelectoral cases involving the electoral vote of Oregon, of South
Carolina, of Louisiana, and of Florida, a voluminous record,
involving many difficult questions, and the remarkable result
follow ed that every one of the 15 follow ed his previous political
'predilection, and by a decision of 8 to 7 decided every point of
importance in that case and decided the result in each o f the
fou r cases in the strictest accord w ith the previous political
opinion of each of these 33 judges sitting upon that electoral
commission to determine the Presidency o f the United States in
the Tilden and H ayes controversy.
It is not necessary to question the integrity of purpose or the
sincerity of judgm ent of any one of the seven great Dem ocrats
who sat on that Electoral Commission or of the eight distin
guished Republicans who sat on it, but it taught a lesson to this
country that men are profoundly influenced by their previous
environment and partisan prejudices. These illustrations could
be multiplied indefinitely.
Mr. President, this peculiar characteristic of mortal man to
be influenced by his previous opinions m ust not be ignored by
prudent statesmen in determining tbe conduct o f government.
I f the Supreme Bench, consisting o f nine excellent gentlemen,
should be composed of nine loyal and patriotic Irishm en, they
would be unanimously in favor of “ home r u le ” for Ireland, and
give most learned reasons for the opinion. Or if this excellent
tribunal should consist of nine loyal and faith fu l Tories, they
w ould conscientiously decide “ home rule ” to be a dangerous
heresy, and give overwhelming argum ents why it should he
denied. N or would it be fa ir or decent to charge them with bad
faith for their decisions or opinions. It is a question of previous
predilection, of previous fixed opinion, of the point o f view which
has molded itself in the personal experience of the judge and
become a part of him.
A President who could be persuaded to appoint a m ajority o f
Irishmen on the Supreme Bench need not be astonished at home7197— 10319
10
rule decisions. N or should he be shocked if a T ory bench de
cide against home rule.
T h is psychological fa ct gives a sound reason for the active
interest of big business in the appointment o f Federal judges.
B ig business men understand perfectly well the importance of
engineering the nomination of judges. Yes, M r. President, and
they understand perfectly well the importance o f engineering
the nom ination of a President of the United States whose honest
sym pathies and view s are in harm ony w ith their point o f view,
so that such an E xecutive should be expected to listen w ith re
spect and w ith conviction to the convincing argum ents in favor
of candidates for the ermine “ who are the right kind of people.”
These am iable gentlemen who engineer nom inations “ know
exactly w hat they w ant.” A s Abraham Lincoln once remarked,
“ For the kind o f people that like that kind o f thing, it is the
very kind of thing that th at kind o f people like.”
I venture to believe, M r. President, that the people of the
United States have slow ly learned to know exactly w hat they
w ant, and the people w ill acquire it by peaceful processes, by
progressive processes, and, am ong other agencies, by the right
of election and of recall of judges.
T H E RECALL J U S T IF IE D AS A M EANS OF CONTROLLING A J U D IC IA L RU LIN G
P O W ER T H A T H A S VIOLATED T H E CO N ST IT U T IO N OF T H E UN ITED ST A T E S ,
VIO LATED T H E R IG H T S OF T IIE ST A T E S , INVADED T H E L E G ISL A T IV E
F U N C T IO N , AND BECOME AN IN ST R U M E N T OF O PPRE SSIO N TH RO U G H
J U D IC IA L L E G ISL A T IO N .
The Federal courts have invaded the Constitution and in
vaded the rights of the States and invaded the legislative func
tion o f Congress and of the States, and have become an instru
ment through which the special interests have been enabled to
block all progressive legislation o f recent years. The manner in
which this has been done has been -well explained by James
A llen Smith, Ph. D ., professor of political science, U niversity of
W ashington, in T h e Spirit of A m erican G overnm ent; by Hon.
W a lte r Clark, chief justice of the Supreme Court of North Caro
lina, in his address before the law departm ent o f the U niversity
o f Pennsylvania, April 27, 1906 (E x h ib it B ) ; by Gilbert E. Itoe,
under the title of “ Our Judicial Oligarchy,” in L a F ollette’s,
June 17. 1911, to July 15, 1 9 1 1 ; Pearson’s, A ugust, 1 9 1 1 ; and by
other able law yers and students of government.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
The Constitutional Convention, secret and reactionary though
it was, fou r tim es refused to provide that the Supreme Court
should pass upon the constitutionality of acts o f Congress, to
w it: On June 5, 1787, the proposal received the vote o f two
States o n ly ; on June 6 , July 21, and A ugust 15 the proposal
w as renewed, and at no tim e received the votes of more than
three States.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
T h is mild provision for d isa p p ro v in g a la w b e fo r e p a ssa g e,
w hich still m ight pass by a tw o-thirds vote of Congress, even if
disapproved by the Supreme Court w as overwhelmingly rejected.
T h e court now vetoes an act of Congress after it is passed,
and a unanimous Congress can not m ake it constitutional or
valid i f th e c o u rt's a ctio n is c o n stitu tio n a l.
Such a provision in the Constitution w ould have defeated it
before the States, yet by slow degrees the Supreme Court has
7197— 10319
11
assumed, without constitutional w arrant, to declare acts of Con
gress unconstitutional.
The Constitution is one of delegated
powers, and it does not delegate the right to declare statutes
unconstitutional.
The courts o f no republic have such authority. In th e great
Republics of New Zealand, A u stralia, Switzerland, and France,
and even in the Em pires o f Great Britain and Germany, A u s
tria, and o f Denm ark, the courts exercise no such right.
I understand the constitution of M exico, our great neighbor
on the south, directly forbids the courts to declare unconsti
tutional an act of the Congress of M exico.
*
$
*
*
*
4c
*
T h e conduct o f George Jeffreys, lord chief justice o f England,
in holding acts of P arliam ent invalid, caused the revolution of
1GSS in England.
The revolution of 1GSS led to the act of settlement o f 1701.
since which tim e Parliam ent has exercised the right o f recall of
English judges.
Thom as Jefferson, in his letter to M r. Jarvis, in 1S20, wisely
s a id :
You seem to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all con
stitutional questions ; a very dangerous doctrine, indeed, and one that
would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.
John M arshall, the fam ous C hief Justice o f the Supreme
Court, before he became C hief Justice, declared in the presence
of the Supreme C o u rt:
The legislative authority of any country can only be restrained by
Its own municipal constitution; this is a principle that springs from
the very nature of society, and the judicial authority can have no right
to question the validity of a law, unless such a jurisdiction is ex
pressly given by the Constitution.
(W are v. Hylton, 3 Dali., 211.)
No one pretends that the jurisdiction is e x p r e s s l y given by the
Constitution, and John M arshall ought to have known it w as
expressly refused.
In all of the great Governments o f Great Britain, Germany,
France, Switzerland, and so forth, the P arliam ent decides the
constitutionality of its own acts, being responsible to the su f
frage of the people. T h e Congress of the United States— consist
ing of 483 elected representatives of the people in the Senate
and House, who took a solemn oath o f office before A lm ighty
God that they would fa ith fu lly observe the Constitution— and
the President are naturally better qualified and fitted to deter
mine the constitutionality of their own acts, being immediately
responsible to their people at home, than any other power.
They are better qualified to do this than the nine law yers com
prising the Supreme Court, who are appointed for life, and who
are not responsible to the people and who are not elected by
the people. The Supreme Court is appointed by the President,
the President being nominated by a national convention con
sisting o f delegates three degrees removed from the people, and
elected by electors several tim es removed from the people.
Those who are directly responsible to the people, those who
have by constitutional authority the right to make the law s,
are charged by the Constitution w ith the duty o f observing the
Constitution in m aking such laws, and they take a solemn oath
to perform this very function.
7197— 10319
12
T o allow their decisions to be set aside by any tribunal not
responsible to tlie people, not elected by the people, not subject
to the recall o f the people, or o f the people's representatives, is
to establish a judicial oligarchy and to overthrow the Republic,
I t very nearly overthrew the Republic under the Dred Scott
decision attem pting to nationalize slavery.
T o permit the Supreme Court to nu llify acts of Congress, de
clared by Congress to be constitutional, is to permit the judicial
branch to overthrow the legislative branch, as it has over
throw n the antitrust law w ithout declaring it unconstitutional.
No such power w as intended by the Constitution to be granted
to the judiciary branch. T h is doctrine w as most em phatically
denied by President Jackson in the case o f the United States
Bank, which the Supreme Court attem pted to uphold against
his policy. Jackson did not perm it it, and received the ap
proval of the people of the country.
T H E J U D IC IA L
RU LIN G PO W ER H A S BECOME A B U LW A R K
PRIV ILE G E .
OF S P E C IA L
Up to 1887 20 Federal statutes and 185 State statutes had been held
invalid by the Supreme Court of the United States alone. This does
not include the innumerable State statutes which the lower Federal
courts have nullified under the shield of the Supreme Court decisions.
This list will be found in One hundred and thirty-first United States
Reports, Appendix C C X X X V , and since that time this list has been
greatly increased, and the decisions have been most objectionable since
1887. These decisions have usually been made by a divided court, but
in some cases the change of a single vote would have completely changed
the result. The legislation thus destroyed was practically all carefully
devised to meet existing and recognized evils, and enacted in response
to an overwhelming demand of the people.
(Gilbert E. Roe.)
These various decisions have not only nullified statutes of the
greatest importance, passed fo r the protection of the people, but
other decisions have been made, w hich are, in effect, judicial
legislation.
T H E GREAT IN D U ST R IA L CORPORATIONS H A V E BEEN SH IE L D E D UNDER
TH ESE
D E C ISIO N S, T H E
CONTROL
OF R A IL W A Y S
AND
M ONOPOLIES
OBSTRUCTED, CO M PEN SATIO N FOR IN D U ST R IA L ACCID EN TS DEFEATED,
AND T H E A RB ITRA TIO N OF IN D U ST R IA L D ISP U TE S STRU C K D O W N, AND
VARIOU S STATE ST ATU TES VETOED AND A B O L ISH ED .
Out of the great multitude I subm it a few instances as illus
trations. F or e x a m p le :
In ex parte Young (209 U. S. 123) the attorney general of Minnesota
is punished for contempt for performing his duty in obedience to the
statute of the State of Minnesota regulating the rates of public-service
corporations.
The s ta t u t e o f T e x a s w as set aside as unconstitutional in the
case o f Galveston, H arrisburg & San Antonio Railroad Co. ver
sus the State of T exas (210 U. S., 2 1 7 ), taxing the gross re
ceipts o f railroad companies within the State.
The s ta tu te o f K a n s a s taxin g the W estern Union Telegraph
Co. w as set aside in like manner. (21 6 U. S., 1.)
The Oklahom a, c o n stitu tio n establishing a corporation commis
sion w as declared invalid under the Constitution o f the United
States by the decision of Justice Hook, March 29, 1911.
Judge Sanborn’s decision in the case o f Sheppard versus
Northern Pacific R ailw ay Co. on A pril 11 practically destroyed
the M innesota statute providing for the regulation of rates *01
public-service corporations.
The fourteenth amendment, intended to protect the negro, has
been tw isted from its purpose to protect the trusts and monop
olies in imposing long hours of labor on employees on the absurd
7197— 10319
13
theory that to deny the employee the right to work long hours is
a denial o f his constitutional “ privileges.”
Everyone knows that the sole intent and purpose of the people in
adding this amendment to the Constitution was to protect the then re
cently emancipated negroes in their rights of citizenship. The courts,
however, have made this amendment include all manner of trusts and
corporations and of contracts and practices, none of which were even
in the thoughts of the people when they adopted the amendment. In
the hands of the courts this amendment has become a shield to pro
tect corporations and combinations of wealth from the legislation aimed
at them by an indignant public and also a sword by which statute after
statute has been cut down, enacted by the lawmaking branch of the
Government in the public interest.
(Roe.)
T h e e m p lo y e r s ' lia b ility a ct, for the protection of employees,
w as held unconstitutional by 5 to 1
(39 Cong. Ilec., 11, 1 8 0 4 ;
40 Cong.* Itec., 93, 1905.)
T h e c o m p u ls o r y a rb itr a tio n act, passed as the result of the
great strike at Chicago in 1S94 and intended to prevent the re
currence of such unfortunate difficulties, w as destroyed by the
Supreme Court. (A d a ir v . U. S., 20S U. S., 1G4.)
T h e i n t e r s ta te -c o m m e r c e a ct has b een em a sc u la ted by the
Supreme Court. (E x h ib it A .)
T h e rv h olcsa le liq u o r in t e r e s t w a s p r o te c te d by the so-called
package decision (L esley v . H ardin, 135 U. S., 1 0 0 ), and it
required a special act of Congress to authorize police powers of
the States to apply to liquor in original packages.
(W ilk erson
v . Ilahrer, 140 U. S., 545.)
T h e p r in c ip les laid d oicn in th e D e c la r a tio n o f In d e p e n d e n c e
w e r e r e v e r s e d in the insular cases, holding that this Republic
had imperial power to govern and control other people as s u b
je c t s , et cetera.
T h e w o r k m e n 's c o m p e n sa tio n laio o f N ew Y ork w as, in like
manner, destroyed by the New Y ork courts. (Iv es v . So. Buffalo
lly . Co., 201 N. Y ., 271.)
T h e in c o m e t a x laio w as struck down in like manner by the
Supreme Court. T h e serious error of the Supreme Court in this
case I heretofore pointed out on the floor o f the Senate, where
the inhibition o f a direct tax on a State w as absurdly construed
to inhibit a direct ta x on a citizen of the United States. (M a y
7, 1909, Ilec., 1821, and M ay 17, 1909, Rec., 2104.)
The deci
sion in his case, by the change of the vote of one jud ge— of
one law yer in this court, appointed at whose instance w e do not
know— has cost the mass of the people of the United States a
hundred million a year for over 1G years, $1,600,000,000 in all,
and relieved those best able to bear the ta x of a like amount.
One billion six hundred m illions of dollars by the vote of one
man, appointed by w hat influence? W e do not know and can
not say. No such power ought to be put in the hands o f any
man. No man not responsible to the people or the representa
tives o f the people ought to have the power to control the fiscal
policy of this Nation contrary to the law of the people o f the
N ation and contrary to the will o f the Senate of the United
States and the Congress of the United States. No such uncon
stitutional decision would have been rendered if the court had
been subject to recall.
W h a t better evidence could be afforded o f the patience, for
bearance, and conservatism o f the people than that they have so
long borne patiently w ith such a decision?
7197— 10319 '
u
4
M r Justice Field, in his opinion in this case, spoke o f the
income tax as “ th e p r e s e n t a ssa u lt u p o n c a p ita l ,” and suggested
that, if the court allow ed it to stand, the tim e w ould come
when the lim itation on the ta x on incomes m ight be designated
by “ a board of w alking delegates.” T h is insolent reference
would have justified his impeachm ent by Congress.
Justice Jackson, on this court, declared this decision “ th e
m o s t d is a stro u s blou) e v e r s tr u c k a t th e c o n stitu tio n a l p o w e r o f
C o n g re ss
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Justice Brow n expressed the fear that the decision, in some
moment o f national peril, w ould rise up to “ f r u s t r a t e th e w ill
and p a r a ly z e th e a r m " o f Congress. H e sa id :
I hope it may not prove Che first step toward the despotism of wealth.
As I can not escape the conviction that the decision of the court in
this great case is fraught with immeasurable danger to the future of
the country, and that it approaches the proportions of a national
calamity, I feel it my duty to enter my protest against it.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Justice H arlan said it w as to be “ deeply deplored ” “ as a dis
aster to the country,” and s a id :
I can not assent to an interpretation of the Constitution that impairs
and cripples the just powers of the National Government in the essential
matter of taxation and at the same time discriminates against the
greater part of the people of our country.
Justice Jackson, Justice Brown, and Justice H arlan are not
radicals, but are all conservatives and patriots, and they de
serve the thanks o f the country for pointing out the dangerous
character o f the decisions o f the Supreme Court in this and
other cases.
T h e most serious feature o f this decision w as that the real
question in the minds of the judges w as not its conflict w ith
the Constitution, but th e ir v i e w o f th e e x p e d ie n c y o f th e in co m e
ta x .
T h e y th o u g h t it had p o lic y, and f o r th a t rea so n fo u n d it
u n c o n stitu tio n a l b y an in telle c tu a l leg erd em a in to s e t a sid e th e
u n b ro k en p r ec ed e n ts o f th e S u p r e m e C o u r t i t s e l f f o r o v e r a
h u n d red y e a r s .
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
T H E A N TIT R U ST ACT.
The S h e rm a n a n titr u st la w h as, by the recent decisions o f the
Supreme Court in the Standard Oil case and in the Tobacco
T ru st case by w riting in the word “ unreasonable,” b een e ffe c t
u a lly d e s tr o y e d .
I t w as loudly proclaimed that the Standard Oil monopoly
had been dissolved by this decision. T h e fact is that the Stand
ard Oil stock im m ediately went up, instead of down, after this
decision w as rendered. On M ay 15, 1911, the day of the decision,
it was G79; and on M ay 19, four days later, it w as GS6 , after the
owners of this stock had had tim e to digest the opinion.
The packers who had been indicted as guilty o f a crime, under
this statute— Sherman antitrust— im m ediately offered the de
fense that their restraint o f trade had been reasonable, and as
they are entitled to a reasonable doubt, th e crim in a l p a rt o f this
s ta tu te is m a d e n u g a to r y b y th e S u p r e m e C o u rt o f th e U n ited
S ta te s . The court has, in effect, vetoed the act of Congress by
judicial legislation.
*
*
7197— 10319
*
*
*
*
*
15
T H E TH EO RY OF J U D IC IA L IN F A L L IB IL IT Y .
I t has alw ays been the habit o f kings and potentates to sur
round themselves w ith pomp and ceremony to impress the mass
o f men w ith their sacred function. They have claim ed to re
ceive the right to rule from God him self, and to rule by divine
right. T h e judge in ancient tim es wore a huge horsehair wig,
silk gown, and ermine. It impressed the people w ith the enor
mous dignity of the individual so attired. I t raised the presump
tion o f his infallibility. I t excited the reverence of men, and so
t h o s e w h o h a v e fo u n d th e ir s h e lte r beh in d a ju d ic ia l o lig a rc h y
h a v e im p r e s s e d t r e m e n d o u s ly u p o n th e p e o p le o f th is c o u n tr y
t h e id ea o f ju d ic ia l in fa llib ility . W e are taught that we should
reverence the co u rts; that we should not question their jud g
ments, and when the Supreme Court o f the United States has
spoken it should no more be questioned than we should question
the W ord o f God.
I believe th a t the people should be taught to reverence the
judicial branch of the Government, and I believe the judicial
branch of the Governm ent should be so fram ed as to m erit rev
erence. I have a reverence for government. I have a reverence
for the ju diciary. I have a great respect for the judges on the
bench, yet I should not hesitate to vote for the impeachment
o f a corrupt judge, nor would I hesitate to vote for the recall of
a ju dge who merited recall or a judge who regarded an income
ta x as an assault on w ealth. The theory o f judicial infallibility
has the sam e meritorious foundation o f truth as Santa Claus.
I t is a pleasing fiction suitable for very young children.
F our out of five o f these distinguished justices and five out o f
fou r are constantly assuring the country, with great gravity
and decorum, in their various opinions o f the honorable and dis
tinguished fallibility o f their brethren on the bench. I f we take
a series o f cases, each ju dge in turn w ill be found in the minor
ity and w ill be discovered in the interesting situation o f having
the m ajority o f the Supreme Court declaring his fallibility.
E ach judge in turn is proven to be fallible by the Supreme Court
o f the United States, until not a single justice is left whose fa lli
bility has not been ju dicially ascertained by a m ajority of the
Supreme Bench of the United States. T his is interesting but
not surprising, fo r nobody ever imagined in the first case that
the justices on the bench were anything but fallible. In the
Legal Tender cases did they not reverse them selves? And w as
not the court packed by President Grant, with the connivance of
Congress, who first reduced the court and then added to it for
this very purpose? In the Standard Oil case and the Tobacco
T ru st case did not the Supreme Court reverse itself and its own
decisions in the Inter-M issouri Freight case of 1S97 and in the
Joint Traffic case in 1S9S, in which the court expressly refused
to w rite the word “ unreasonable ” before “ restraint o f trade ” ?
T h is fiction o f ju d icial in fallibility m ight as w ell be abandoned
by thinking men.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Congress is authorized by the Constitution (A rt. I l l , sec. 1)
to ordain and establish the Supreme Court and the inferior
courts. B y the judiciary act o f September 24. 17S9 (1 Stat.,
7 3 ), it did ordain and establish these courts, designating how
many judges should be on the court, providing them with suit
able conveniences, fixed the time when they should hold office
7197— 10319
16
and the place where they should hold office, providing their
salary, and annually thereafter made the appropriation to keep
them in office and compensate them for their services.
Congress has, since then, increased the number o f judges of
the Supreme Court. I t has diminished the number of the
Supreme Court, as it did in the Legal Tender cases, to 7 judges,
and thereafter increased the number again to 9 judges (A p r.
10, 1S 6 9 ), and obviously under the law could provide for 25
judges on this bench or 75 or diminish it to 3 judges. I t cer
tainly has the legal p o w e r to refuse to appropriate its salaries if
it w ants to do so.
T h e exercise of such powers as I have enumerated— the power
of impeachment, the power to ordain and establish the court,
to determine the number o f judges on the bench, the power to
pay or w ithhold salaries, to determine when it shall sit and
where it shall sit— certainly carries w ith it the sm aller and
lesser power o f recalling judges from the bench for bad be
havior and to determine w hat bad behavior is.
*
*
'
'
*
*
*
*
j
P U B L IC O PIN IO N OF J U D IC IA L ABUSE.
M r. President, the country has been profoundly disturbed by
the aggression o f the courts, by the nullification o f acts of Con
gress on alleged constitutional grounds, by judicial legislation,
even where the constitutionality o f the act w as conceded, and by
the other judicial aggressions I have pointed out.
The Republican platform o f 190S declares against certain in
junctions by the court.
The Dem ocratic platform (19 0 8) protests against government
by injunction.
T h e Independence P arty (1908) condemns the arbitrary use
of injunctions and contempt proceedings by the courts as a vio
lation o f the fundam ental American right o f trial by jury.
The People’s P arty of 190S em phatically condemned the un
ju st assum ption o f authority by inferior Federal courts into
nullifying by injunction the laws o f the State and demanding its
prohibition, and so forth.
The Socialist Party, casting h alf a million votes and repre
senting two and a h alf m illion people in 1908, said “ our courts
are in the hands o f the ruling classes.”
(Col. R oosevelt; President T a f t ; President L in co ln ; United
States Circuit Judge Grossc-up; Hon. W a lte r L. Clark, chief
ju stice of the Supreme Court o f North C a ro lin a ; Hon. W illia m
Jennixgs B r y a n ; M r. Justice H a r la n ; Hon. Gilbert E. R o e ; ana
others, quoted to show the attitude o f the courts.)
❖
*
*
*
*
I believe in the sovereignty of the people o f the United States
and not in the sovereignty of any judicial tribunal appointed for
life. I therefore believe that they should be subject to recall,
as the constitution authorizes.
_
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Is it possible that all o f the States of the Union are wrong
in their view o f the necessity o f controlling the judiciary by
the popular vote? And if they be right, Mr. President, by what
reasoning do the Senators on this floor representing those
States disregard or lightly set aside the ascertained view s of
policy of the people o f their own States?
7197— 10310
o
?
“ IF THE PEOPLE REALLY RULE, WHY DON’T THE
PEOPLE GET WHAT THEY W A N T ?”
The
The
The
The
Election of Senators by Direct Vote of the People
Need for the Direct Rule of the People
Laws Needed for the People’s Rule
Method by Which to Obtain the People’s Rule
SPEECH
OF
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
OF OKLAHOMA
IN THE
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
W ASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
31092—10612
1912
SPEECH
OF
HON.
EOBEET
L.
OWEN.
The Senate having under consideration the election o f Senators by direct vote o f the
people—
M r. O W E N s a id :
M r. P r e s i d e n t : On the 21st day o f M ay, 1908, in accordance w ith the w ishes
o f the L egislatu re o f the State o f Oklahom a, expressed by resolution o f January
9, 1908, I introduced Senate resolution No. 91, providing fo r the submission o f a
constitutional am endm ent for the election o f Senators by direct vote o f the
people.
A rticle V of the Constitution provides th a t Congress, whenever tw o-thirds of
both H ou ses shall deem it necessary, shall propose am endm ents to the C onsti
tution or, on the application o f the legislatu res o f tw o-thirds of the several
States, sh all call a convention for proposing am endm ents which, in either case,
shall be valid w hen ratified by the legislatures o f three-fourths o f the several
States or by conventions in three-fou rths thereof, a s the one or other mode o f
ratification m a y be proposed by Congress.
T h e reasons w h y the people w ish th is proposed reform are thoroughly w ell
understood.
First. I t w ill m ake the Senate o f the U nited States more responsive to the
w ishes o f the people of the U n ited States.
Second. I t w ill prevent the corruption o f legislatures.
T hird. I t w ill prevent the improper use o f money in the cam paigns before the
electorate by men am bitiou s to obtain a seat in the Senate o f the U nited States.
Fourth. I t w ill prevent the disturbance and turm oil o f State legislatures and
the interferences w ith S tate legislation by the violent contests o f candidates for
a position in the U nited States Senate.
F ifth . I t w ill compel candidates fo r the U nited States Senate to be subjected
to the severe scrutiny o f a cam paign before the people and compel the selection
o f the best-fitted men.
Sixth. I t w ill prevent deadlocks, due to political contests in which various
S tates from tim e to tim e have been thus left unrepresented.
Seventh. I t w ill popularize governm ent and tend to increase the confidence
o f the people o f the U nited S tates in the Senate of the U nited States, w hich has
been to some extent im paired in recent years.
M r. President, as the State o f Idaho points out, and as the State o f N ew Jersey
points out, in their resolutions herewith subm itted th e H o u s e o f R e p r e s e n t a t iv e s
o f t h e C o n g r e s s o f t h e U n ite d S t a t e s ha s on f o u r s e p a r a t e o cc a s io n s p a s s e d b y
a t w o -th ir d s v o t e a resolution proposing an am endm ent to the Constitution
providing for the election o f U nited States Senators by direct vote o f the people.
A n d the Senate has, on each occasion, failed or refused to vote upon such
resolution or to subm it such constitutional am endm ent to the several States
for their action, a s contem plated by the Constitution o f the U nited States.
On July 21, 1894, the H ou se o f R epresentatives, by vote o f 141 to 50 ( C o n
g r e s s i o n a l R e c o r d , vol. 26, p. 7 7 8 3 ), and on M ay 11, 1898, by vote o f 185 to 11
( C o n g r e s s i o n a l R e c o r d , vol. 31, p. 4 8 2 5 ), and on A p ril 13, 1900, by vote o f 242
to 15 ( C o n g r e s s i o n a l R e c o r d , vol. 33, p . 4 1 2 8 ), and on February 13, 1902, by a
viva voce vote, nem. con. ( C o n g r e s s i o n a l R e c o r d , vol. 35, p. 1 7 2 2 ), has recorded
the w ishes o f every congressional district o f the U nited States, w ith negligible
exceptions, in fa v o r o f this reform.
T h e Speaker o f the F ifty-fifth Congres's said, and M r. Corliss, February 19,
1902, repeated the sentiment, “ that th is w as a m easure dem anded by the A m eri
can people, and th at the M em bers o f th is H ouse, representing directly the people,
should p ass this m easure, and continue to pass it, and knock upon the doors of
the Senate until it listens to the voice o f the people.”
( C o n g r e s s io n a l R ecord,
vol. 35, p. 1721.)
31092— 106i2
(2 )
I
3
I s a unanim ous ro te o f tlae H ou se of R epresentatives an index to the w ishes
o f the A m erican people or is the w ill o f the people o f sufficient im portance to
persuade the Senate to act and com ply w ith their repeatedly expressed w ishes?
On M ay 23, 1908, I called attention o f the Senate to the various resolutions
passed by 27 S tates o f the Union praying Congress and the Senate fo r th is
reform , and on beh alf o f m y own S tate o f Oklahom a I urged the Senate to act.
Over m y protest the Senate referred th is jo in t resolution 91 to the Com m ittee
on P rivileges and E lections by the follow in g v o te :
The result was announced— yeas 33, nays 20, as fo llo w s :
A ldrich
Allison
Bacon
Bankhead
Brandegee
Briggs
Burnham
Burrows
Carter
Clark, Wyo.
Crane
Cullom
Depew
Dick
Dillingham
Foraker
Gallinger
Guggenheim
Ankeny
Beveridge
Borah
Brown
Clapp
YEAS— 33.
Hale
Heyburn
Hopkins
Kean
Knox
Lodge
Long
Nelson
Penrose
Dixon
Gore
Johnston
La Follette
McCreary
Richardson
Smith, Md.
Stewart
Warner
Warren
Wetmore
NAYS— 20.
Newlands
Piles
Owen
Simmons
Overman
Smith, Mich.
Paynter
Stephenson
Perkins
Teller
NOT VOTING— 39.
Bailey
Dolliver
Hansbrough
Platt
Bourne
du Pont
Hemenway
Rayner
Bulkeley
Elkins
Kittredge
Scott
Burkett
F lint
McCumber
Smoot
Clarke, Ark.
Foster
McEnery
Stone
Clay
Frasier
McLaurln
Sutherland
Culberson
Frye
Martin
Taliaferro
Curtis
Fulton
Milton
Taylor
Daniel
Gamble
Money
Tillman
Davis
Gary
Nixon
(Page 7115 C o n g r e s s io n a l R ec or d , May 23, 1908.)
This vote m ean t the d efeat of the proposed constitutional am endment.
T h e Senator from M ichigan [M r. B u r r o w s ], chairm an of the Com m ittee on
P rivileges and Elections, never gave an y hearing on this resolution and never
reported it, but allow ed the Sixtieth Congress to expire w ithout talcing any ac
tion in regard to it, n otw ithstanding the L egislature o f the S tate o f M ichigan
had theretofore by join t resolution expressly favored the submission of an
am endm ent for the election o f Senators by direct vote.
On July 7, 1909, I introduced the sam e resolution again in the present Con
gress as Senate Joint R esolution No. 41.
I trust I may not be regarded as inconsiderate, too hasty, or too
urgent, if after waiting over two years for a report by the Senator from
Michigan, I now call upon him to perform his duty to the people and re
spond to their repeatedly expressed wishes in this matter, or else that he
frankly refuse to do so.
M r. President, the present Com m ittee on P rivileges and E lections o f the
Senate is composed o f the follow in g M embers, 8 Republicans and 5 D e m o c ra ts:
J u l iu s C. B u r r o w s o f Michigan, C h a u n c b y M. D e p e w o f New York, A l b e r t J. B e v
e r id g e o f Indiana, W i l l i a m P. D i l l in g h a m o f Vermont, J o n a t h a n P. D o l l iv e r o f Iowa,
R o b e r t J. G a m b l e o f South Dakota, W eld o n B. H e y b u r n o f Idaho, M o rgan G. B u l k e l e y
o f Connecticut, J o s e p h W . B a il e y o f Texas, J a m b s B . F r a zie r o f Tennessee, T h o m a s H.
P a y n t e r o f Kentucky, J o s e p h F. J o h n s t o n o f Alabama, D u n c a n U. F l e t c h e r o f Florida.
Ten o f these 13 States favor the choice o f Senators by the vote o f the people,
but I fea r the Senators from Verm ont, N ew Y ork, and Connecticut, whose
S tates are not officially committed, m ay unduly influence the committee, para
lyze its activities, and prevent a favorable ansiver to the petition or w ishes o f
the 37 other States.
E igh t Republican Senators, a s a practical m atter, control the policy o f this
com m ittee, and 4 o f these can prevent action under the present very enlightened
system o f organized party m anagem ent o f the m a jo rity party, which is under an
influence that is alm ost occult, and a m anagem ent that seems excellently w ell
devised to control a ll com m ittee action by a m ajority o f a m a jo rity plan that
enables 4 to d efeat 13 on the Com m ittee on Privileges an d Elections. T h is is
an exam ple o f w h at is called “ m achine politics.”
*
*
31092— 10612
*
*
*
*
*
4
T h e fu lle r d etails relative to prim ary elections w ill be found in the work
P rim ary Elections, a Study o f the H istory and T endencies o f P rim ary Election
L egislation, by C. E dw ard M erriam , associate professor o f political science in
the U n iversity o f Chicago, 1908.
Only nine S tates— N ew E ngland, N ew Y ork, D elaw are, and W e s t V irginia—
have failed to definitely act in favor o f the election or selection o f Senators by
direct vote o f the people, and even, in these States the tendency o f the people
is strongly m anifested tow ard such selection o f Senators.
In W e s t V irgin ia they have prim aries in alm ost all o f the counties, instructing
m em bers o f the legislatu re a s to the election o f Senators.
In D elaw are the election o f the members o f the legislature carries w ith it an
understanding as to the vote o f the member on the Senatorship.
In M assach u setts the legislatu re, through the house o f representatives, has
ju s t passed a resolution favorable to th is constitutional am endm ent and is now
considering the in itiative and referendum.
M aine h as recently adopted the in itiative and referendum — the people’s rule.
I t is obvious th at in M ain e the question o f w ho shall be Senator is entering
vigorously into the question o f the election o f m em bers o f the legislature, and
com m itm ents are dem anded o f candidates for the leg islatu re; and so in greater
or less degree even in some other N ortheastern States, w hich are not definitely
com m itted to the election o f Senators by direct vote o f the people, a sim ilar
method is follow ed, which, in effect, operates a s an instruction, m ore or less
pronounced, in favo r o f a candidate for the Senate.
In the five rem aining States, N ew Y ork, N ew H am pshire, Verm ont, Con
necticut, and Rhode Island, a m a jo rity o f the people unquestionably favo r the
election o f Senators by direct vote o f the people, w hich is dem onstrated by the
approval o f the D em ocrats o f these S tates o f this policy and in addition by the
various nonpartisan organizations, the N ational Grange, A m erican F ederation
o f Labor, and so forth, and by the attitude o f m any individual Republicans, who
are not sufficiently strong, how ever, to control the party management.
In the effort I m ade to have the am endm ent to the Constitution subm itted to
the various S tates on M ay 23, 1908 (S . J. Res. 9 1 ) , it w as obvious th a t I had
not the sym pathy o f those who control the Senate and no vote from a North
eastern State.
I had, in fact, the active opposition o f the Senator from Rhode Island [M r.
A l d r ic h ], the Senator from M assachusetts [M r. L odge], the Senator from N ew
Jersey [M r. K e a n ], the Senator from M aine [M r. H a l e ], the Senator from Penn
sylvania [M r. P enrose ], the Senator from N ew Y ork [M r. D e p e w ] — the leaders
o f the Republican P arty in the Senate. T he Senator from M assachusetts and
the Senator from Rhode Islan d and the Senator from New Jersey actually tried
to prevent m y obtaining a vote, resorting to the sm all parliam entary device o f
asserting or suggesting th at I w as asking unanim ous consent fo r a vote a fter
I had m oved the Senate to take the vote. I f I had acceded to this untrue
assertion consent would have been denied and a vote thus prevented. W h a t does
th is fear o f a record m ean?
I do not in the least complain o f such parliam entary tactics, nor o f the oppo
sition. I m erely think it m y duty to call the attention o f the country to it,
th at it m ay not be doubted that the R epublican leaders o f the Senate are opposed
to giving the people o f the U nited S tates the power to choose their own Senators.
T h e right o f the people to elect Senators ought not to be denied, and the party
leaders who are unw illing to trust the people to elect M em bers o f the Senate
ought not to be trusted w ith power, because the Senate can block and actually
does block every reform the people desire.
T h e Senate h as frequently been used to obstruct the w ill o f the people, and
especially the w ill o f the people to elect Senators by direct vote.
I had then and I w ill have to-day the efficient opposition o f the Republican
m anagers o f the Senate, who do not listen to the voice o f the people, even if
they believe in it. T h e Senator from Rhode Island, for exam ple, the acknow l
edged leader, h as an environment that unfits him to believe in the w isdom o f
popular governm ent, because in R hode Island, under an unw ise and archaic
m echanism the governm ent o f the State is said to be controlled by about 11 per
cent o f its voters and w h at m igh t fa ir ly be called a p arty machine, w hich is
under the pow erful domination o f commercial interests. I do not say this in any
sense a s a reproof, because I believe each S tate m ust determ ine its own m anage
ment, but as an historical observation, w hich I think is accurately made, and a s
show ing the im portant need o f im provem ent in our system o f government.
31092— 10612
5
The Senator from Rhode Island, in answ er to m y presentation o f the resolu
tions passed by the various 27 States, asked the follow ing illum inating question
of m e :
A
.
Mr.
ldrich Does the Senator from Oklahoma understand that
vote according to the instructions of his legislature?
a
Senator is bound
to
W h ile I answered in the negative, a s a mere legal proposition, nevertheless
I do think th at when the opinion o f the people o f a State is thoroughly w ell
made up a Senator ought not only to be bound by it, but that he ought to feel
glad to carry into effect the w ill o f the people whom he represents, and ought
not to set up for h im self a knowledge or an understanding greater than that
o f the people o f the entire State who have sent him a s their representative.
I believe th a t the w ill o f the people is fa r more nearly right, in the main,
than the w ill o f any individual statesm an w ho is apt to be honored by them
w ith a transitory seat in the S en ate; th at the w hole people are more apt to be
safe and sane, more apt to be sound and honest than a single individual. A t
all events, I feel not only w illing, but I really desire to m ake effective the w ill
of the people o f m y State. I believe in popular government, and I believe that
the people are m ore conservative, more “ safe and sane,” and more nearly apt
to do right in the long run than am bitious statesm en tem porarily trusted w ith
power.
I w ill subm it, M r. President, the direct evidence and record o f the public
opinion o f the people o f the United States a s expressed through their legisla
tures, or by the voluntary act o f party regulations in instructing candidates fo r
the legislatu re on the question o f the election o f U nited States Senators, or by
prim ary la w s a s fa r a s they apply.
It w ill be thus seen that D em ocratic States and Republican States alike,
w est o f the H udson R iver, have acted favorably in this m atter practically
w ithout exception. O nly eight or nine States have failed to act, and I do
not doubt that i f the voice of the people o f these States o f N ew England, o f
N ew Y ork , M aryland, and D elaw are could find convenient expression, free from
ma.cmne politics, every one o f them w ould favor the election o f Senators by
direct vote, and w ould favo r the right o f the people to instruct their Repre
sentatives in Congress and in the Senate, a right which they enjoyed from the
beginning o f the A m erican Republic down to the days w hen this right w as
smothered and destroyed by the convention system o f party management.
N ot only the S tates have acted alm ost unanim ously in favo r o f this right o f
the people, but all the great parties o f the country have declared in favor o f
it, except the Republican P arty, and th is party w ould have declared for it
except fo r the overw helm ing influence and domination o f m achine politics in the
m anagem ent o f that party and the prevalence o f so-called boss influence
And
th is is dem onstrated by the fa c t th at the large m a jo rity o f the Republican
States, by the resolutions or acts o f their legislatures, have declared in favor
o f it, an d th at several tim es the H ouse o f Representatives, when Republican,
oy a tw o-thirds vote, passed a resolution to subm it such a constitutional
am endment.
T h e trouble is the machine has gotten control o f the Republican management
o f the Senate and can thus block every reform the people w ant. T h e insur
gents insurge in vain.
I f I remember correctly, the Senator from W isconsin [M r. L a F ollette ], at
the la st national Republican convention, raised this issue on the floor o f the
convention, and the proposal to put in the Republican platform the election of
Senators by direct vote o f the people w as defeated by the powerful influence
o f a political machine, which, on th at occasion, m anifested itself in the delegates
there present— a machine so obviously a machine as to excite the term o f
derision, “ the steam roller.” The “ steam roller ” is not an emblem o f repre
sentative free governm ent o f a free people.
*
*
*
*
*
*
Mr. President, I have great personal respect fo r very m any o f the representa
tives o f the great party the control o f w hich by machine m ethods I am assailing
on the floor o f th is body, and do not wish to appear to say anything that w ould
im ply the contrary. I am assailing a bad system o f government, w hich leads
to evil, and not assailin g individuals, or desiring to do so.
I do not approve m achine m ethods in the Senate, in the House, or in the
m anagem ent o f parties, because it leads to absolute bad governm ent and gives
peculiar opportunity.
31092— 10612
The Democratic Party, representing about half of the voters of the United
States (6,409.104 voters), in its national platform adopted at Denver, Colo.,
July 10, 1908, says:
We favor the election of United States Senators by direct vote of the people, and regard
this reform as the gateway to other national reforms.
In like manner the Democratic national platform in 1900 had declared for—
Election o f United States Senators by the direct v ote of the people, and w e fa vor direct
legislation wherever practicable.
And in 1904 repeated the doctrine:
We favor the election of United States Senators by the direct vote of the people.
The platform of the Independence Party, adopted at Chicago, 111., July 28,
1908, declared for direct nominations generally, and further made the following
declaration:
*
We advocate the popular election of United States Senators and of judges, both State
and Federal, * * *
and any constitutional amendment necessary to these ends.
The platform of the Prohibition Party, adopted at Columbus, Ohio, July 16,
1908, made the following its chief plank after the prohibition question, to w it:
The election of United States Senators by direct vote of the people.
-1
The platform of the Hew York Democratic League, adopted at Saratoga, N. Y.,
September 10, 1909, declares for the—
Election of United States Senators by the direct vote of the people.
The platform of the People's Party at Sioux Falls (1900) contained the fol
lowing declaration:
We demand that United States Senators be elected by direct vote of the people.
The American Federation of Labor, consisting of 118 national and interna
tional unions, representing, approximately, 27,000 local unions, 4 departments,
38 branches, 594 city central unions, and 573 local unions, with an approximately
paid membership of 2,000,000 men, representing between eight and ten millions
of Americans, with 245 papers, have declared repeatedly in favor of the election
of Senators by direct vote of the people.
The National Orange, comprising the Association of Farmers in the Northeast
and in Central States, including nearly every farmer in Maine and in the New
England States, and in Pennsylvania and Ohio and Michigan, the Society of
Equity and the Farmers' Educational and Cooperative Union of the West and
South, and all together representing the organized farmers of the entire United
States, have declared in favor of the election of Senators by direct vote of the
people. In this group of people our census of 1900 disclosed 10,438,218 adult
workers and probably 45,000,000 people.
The State of Iowa in a joint resolution of April 12, 1909, makes the follow
ing statement:
^
Whereas the failure of Congress to submit such amendment to the States has made It
clear that the only practicable method of securing submission of such an amendment to
the States is through a constitutional convention to be called by Congress upon the
application of the legislatures of two-thirds of all the States—
And the Legislature of Iowa therefore resolved in favor of a constitutional
convention, in effect, because of the neglect and refusal of the Senate of the
United States to perform its obvious duty in the premises, the lower House hav
ing, by a two-thirds vote on four previous occasions, passed a resolution provid
ing for the submission of such a constitutional amendment.
In the speech of the Hon. William II. Taft accepting the Republican nomina
tion for the office of President of the United States at Cincinnati, Ohio, on
July 28, 1908, he said:
With respect to the election of Senators by the people, personally I am inclined to
favor it, but it is hardly a party question. A resolution in its favor has passed a Repub
lican House of Representatives several times, and has been rejected in a Republican
Senate by the votes of Senators from both parties. It has been approved by the legis
latures of many Republican States. In a number of States, both Democratic and Repub
lican, substantially such a system now prevails.
The President justly says it is hardly a party question, and that personally
he is inclined to favor i t ; that a resolution in its favor has passed a Repub
lican House of Representatives several times, but has been rejected in a Re
publican Senate by votes of Senators from both parties; that it has been ap310 9 2 — 10612*
r
7
proved by the legislatu res o f m any Republican S ta te s ; nevertheless, it is per
fectly obvious to the country th a t any action by the Senate in fa v o r o f
com plying w ith the w ill o f the people o f the U nited S tates in this connection
w ill be rejected.
I n atu rally ask, under the circum stances, since the D em o
cratic P arty is fu lly com m itted to it, since m any Republican S tates fa v o r it,
since a R epublican H ou se o f R epresentatives has passed a resolution in its
fa v o r several tim es, since a R epublican P resident is inclined to fa v o r it, W h y
ca n t h e p e o p le g e t n o a c tio n f
I n atu ra lly ask under the circum stances, D o the
people rule, or are they ruled by m achine ru le unduly influenced by com m ercial
interests?
M r. President, I now su bm it the resolutions or ab stract o f law s o f 37 States,
over th ree-fou rth s o f the S tates o f th e U nion, w hich have show n them selves a s
favo rin g election o f Senators by direct vote o f the people or by direct nom i
nations, either by these resolutions or by actual practice in prim aries.
I know th a t th e leaders o f the R epublican P a rty in the U nited S tates Senate
w ill refu se to com ply w ith the express desire o f over three-fou rths o f the
S tates in this m a tter, but they ought not to be understood by the people o f the
U nited S tates to have done th is in ignorance, and fo r th a t reason I propose to
insert in th e R ecord the attitu d e o f the 37 S tates th a t fa v o r the election o f
Senators by direct vote o f the people, and m erely ask the sim ple q u e stio n :
“ D o the people ru le ?”
A s it w ould take considerable tim e to read all these resolutions, I ask the
consent o f the Senate to insert them w ith ou t reading except in so f a r as they
m ay be needed.
T h e V I C E -P R E S I D E N T . W ith o u t objection, the request is granted.
T h e m atter referred to is as fo llo w s (see C o n g r e s s i o n a l R ecord o f M a y 31,
1910) :
H ere find resolutions, law s, etc., o f 37 States.
In spite o f 37 S tates dem anding
Senators b y vote o f the people, in
un iversality o f opinion, the w ill o f
o f a hearing.
M r. President, I a sk y o u , I a sk
or adopting the indirect m ethod o f selecting
spite o f all the evidence subm itted to show
the A m erican people is refused the courtesy
t h e S e n a te , I a sk
th e p e o p le o f th e
TJnited
S t a t e s , D o th e p e o p le r e a l l y r u l e t
T h e refu sal o f the Senate o f the U nited S tates to p erform its obvious duty
in th is m atter o f the su bm ission o f a constitutional am endm ent fo r the election
o f Senators by direct vote, w h ile very im portant a s the g a t e w a y to o t h e r
n e e d e d r e f o r m s , is, how ever, m erely characteristic o f the Senate under the
control o f a p arty m anagem ent th a t is ruled by a m achine m ethod unduly in
fluenced by com m ercial allies and the so-called big interests. I shall presently
show th a t the people can get none o f the reform s they w an t w hile this un
fortu n ate condition rem ains.
M r. P resident, the unw earied and unconquerable D em ocracy in the opening
d eclarations o f its la st n ational p latform laid dow n the great issue that m ust
n ext be settled in th is country and s a i d :
W e rejoice at the increasing signs of an awakening throughout the country.
The
various investigations have traced graft and political corruption to the representatives of
predatory wealth and laid bare the unscrupulous methods by which they have debauched
elections and preyed upon a defenseless public through the subservient officials whom
they have raised to place and power.
“ The c o n s c ie n c e o f th e N a tio n is n o w a ro u sed to f r e e th e G o v e r n m e n t fr o m th e g rip o f
th o s e w h o h a v e m a d e i t a b u sin ess a s s e t o f th e fa v o r -s e e k in g c o r p o r a tio n s ; It must become
again a p e o p le ’ s g o v e r n m e n t and be administered in all its departments according to the
Jeffersonian maxim, E q u a l r ig h ts to a ll a n d 's p e c ia l p r iv ile g e s to n o n e.”
Sh
all
all
th e
th e
people
q u e s t io n s
ru le
now
?
is
th e
under
THE
o v e r s h a d o w in g
d is c u s s io n
G R E A T E ST
is s u e
w h ic h
m a n if e s t s
it s e l f
in
.
OF A L L
IS S U E S .
M r. P resident, th e greatest o f all issues, not only in the U nited S tates but
throughout the civilized w orld, is the issu e o f popular governm ent, or the gov
ernm ent o f th e people ag ain st delegated governm ent, or governm ent by conven
tion, or governm ent by m achine politics.
T h e v ital question is, Shall the people ru le? S hall they control the m echanism
o f p arty governm ent?
S h all they have the direct power to nom inate, to in
struct, to recall th eir public se rv a n ts ; to legislate directly and to enact law s
they w an t and to veto la w s they do not w ant, free from corruption, intim idation,
or force, a s w ell as elect S enators who claim to represent them on this floor?
31092— 10612
8
The Senator from Oregon well says (May 5, 1910) :
“
A B SO L U T E G O V E R N M E N T B T T H E
PEO PLE.
“ Under the machine and political-boss system the confidence of sincere par
tisans is often betrayed by recreant leaders in political contests and by public
servants who recognize the irresponsible machine instead of the electorate as
the source of power to which they are responsible. If the enforcement of the
Oregon laws will right these wrongs, then they were conceived in wisdom and
born in justice to the people, in justice to the public servant, and in justice to
the partisan.
“Plainly stated, the aim and purpose of the laws are to destroy the irre
sponsible political machine and to put all elective offices in the State m direct
touch with the people as the real source of authority;
to elimi
nate dominance of corporate and corrupt influences in the administration of
public affairs. The Oregon laws mark the course that must be pursued before
the wrongful use of corporate power can be dethroned, the people restored to
power, and lasting reform secured.
in short, to give direct
and full force to the ballot of every individual elector in Oregon and
They insure absolute government by the
people.”
THE
SECR ET
A L L IA N C E
BETW EEN
M A C H IN E
P O L IT IC S
AND
S P E C IA L
IN T E R E S T S .
Mr. President, the great evil from which the American people have suffered
in recent years has been the secret but well-known alliance between commer
cial interests and machine politics, by which special interests have endeavored
and often succeeded in obtaining legislation giving them special advantages in
Nation, State, and in municipalities over the body of the American people and
obtained administrative and judicial immunity so that the laws have not been
properly enforced against them; by which means they have enriched themselves
at the expense of the American people; at the expense of Democrats and
Republicans alike; by which private individuals have become enormously and
foolishly rich, and many millions of people intellectually, physically, financially,
or morally weak have been reduced to poverty and to a condition of relative
financial, industrial, and moral degradation.
Mr. President, the mad scramble for unneeded millions, the unrestrained lust
for money and power has become a national and a world-wide scandal. How
unwise it seems, Mr. President, when a man already has more than enough to
gratify every want, every taste, every luxury, every wish that is within the
bounds of reason or of common sense that he should still pursue a mad race
for sordid wealth, using his great opportunities for good, not for the welfare of
his poorer and weaker brothers, but to press them to hard labor through the
artificial mechanism of corporate taskmasters like galley slaves sent to twelve
hours of labor seven days a week, to degeneracy and ruin, as has been reported
to this Senate through the protected iron and steel industries of Pittsburgh
(Pittsburgh Survey) and at Bethlehem (Report of Secretary of Commerce
and Labor).
What an evil inflence over our national life is being exercised by the false
social standards of lavish extravagance and wasteful ostentation, standards set
by the thoughtless rich and imitated in graduated degrees by their satellites and
admirers down through society to those who can not afford extravagance with
out injury or ruin. Our whole society is being injuriously affected by these
false standards of “ high living.” People have automobiles who have no
homesteads.
Mr. President, I regard it as of great importance that the country should
understand the manner in which commercial interests are using the powers of
government through the mechanism of machine polities.
Many men without the slightest intention of departing from the line of the
strictest rectitude nevertheless engage in the political game and use machine
politics for their own preferment, recognizing no better method and thinking
it to be a fact that purity in politics is an iridescent dream, and content that
they are themselves guilty of no criminal or gross immoral act. My comments
on these matters are intended to have no application whatever to any individual
tn the sense of imputing to him a bad or depraved motive. It is the system
which I attack.
All men where severely tempted are liable to err, and I believe our Govern
ment should be so changed as to protect the individual from temptation of any
kind as we would protect a friend from exposure to disease.
31092— 10612
9
M r. P resident, I b a re no desire to seek p artisan advantage by pointing out the
w eaknesses o f governm ent under present m ethods o f p arty m anagem ent. I
shou ld like to see the com plete restoration o f good governm ent in the U nited
States.
I t w ill require the m ost vigorous efforts o f the honest men o f both panties to restore the Governm ent to a condition o f integrity, w here high purposes,
honor, and the com m on good sh all exclu sively rule.
*
*
*
*
THE
*
B IP A R T IS A N
*
*
A SP E C T .
M r. President. I sh all not offend the colum ns of the Congressional R ecord
w ith th e m u ltitu des o f instances of corruption in m unicipality, city, or F ederal
G overnm ent w ith w hich the public press h a s been constantly filled. T h e cor
ruption show n in St. L ou is by M r. F o lk ; in San F rancisco by H e n e y ; in C hi
cago ; in P ittsburgh, w here m ore th an 4 0 m em bers o f the city council w ere in
dicted fo r g r a f t ; in A lb an y , N . Y . ; in H arrisburg, P a .; in N ew Y o r k ; in B o sto n ;
in P h ilad elp h ia— the w ide prevalence o f corruption in governm ent in our great
Republic is a deep n ation al disgrace. T h e num ber o f egregious instances is
both shocking and am azing. T h is n ation -w ide evil is, how ever, d irectly d ue to
th e w eakn ess o f hum an natu re and th e defective m echanism o f party govern
m ent w hich h a s unavoidably developed under a system o f m achine politics, w ith
its corrupt and corrupting m ethods, w hich su bjects men to tem p tations th a t too
often prove irresistible. T h e evil, under such a bad system , w ould arise under
any p arty in pow er, and can be absolutely elim inated and eradicated by the law s
I propose.
A distinguished statesm an once said th a t the idea o f purity in politics w as
in iridescent dream .
T h e people retired him , and th ereafter he described h im se lf as “ a statesm an
ou t o f a job .”
H e neglected h is opportunity to find a rem edy and point it out. Y e t he w a s
a w ell-m ean in g m an, an orator and a scholar o f great a b ility ; bu t he saw no
w ay out.
P U R IT Y
IN
P O L IT IC S .
I t is n ot true, M r. President, th a t pu rity in politics is an iridescent dream .
I t can be m ade a rea lity through the Oregon system o f p opular governm ent and
b y th e overthrow o f the im perfect m echanism o f p arty governm ent w hich h as
evolved th e bad system o f m achine-rule governm ent. T h e rem edy f o r th e evils
from w hich ou r n ation al, S tate, and municipal governm ents h av e suffered is to
restore th e ru le o f th e people— to restore the fu ll p ow ers o f governm ent to the
people b y th e Oregon s y s te m ; to p ass la w s by w hich th e people can d irectly
nom inate, d irectly Initiate la w s they d o w ant, d irectly veto la w s they do not
w an t, d irectly recall public servants, b y w hich the people can set asid e political
m ercenaries w h o often seize upon th e rein s o f p arty control under color o f
p a rty en th u siasm w ith the cold-blooded, crim inal purpose o f selling governm ent
fa v o r o f profit or power. I p ray the leaders o f all parties to prom ote the rule
o f the people b y th e Oregon system .
T h e people h av e no sinister purposes. T h e people w ill not sell o u t
The
The
The
The
people
people
people
people
are “ safe and sane."
are conservative and sound.
are honest and intelligent.
would vote for the public interest alone and w ould n ot vote fo r
purely selfish p rivate interests.
T h e people w ould not gran t 9 9-ye ar or perpetual corporate fran chises or legis
la tiv e privileges o f enorm ous valu e w ith ou t adequate consideration.
The people would not deprive any persons of their just rights.
Under the rule of the people the issue of world^widc peace would he raised
and would, by popular bote of all nations, be made a permanent international
law.
The people know more than their Representatives do, and are less passionate
and less liab le to be led into either internal o r international com plications.
The people are worthier to be confided in than an y in d ividu als trusted w ith
tem p orary power.
The people would be economical in government.
U n der the ru le o f th e people, w ith th e righ t o f recall, their public serv an ts
w ou ld be m ore upright, m ore fa ith fu l, m ore diligent, m ore econom ical, and m ore
h o n e s t; the public sen d ee w ould be p u rifie d ; th e bad exam ple o f corruption and
31092— 10612
10
extravagance in high places w ould be rem oved and new and better standards o f
public and p rivate conduct w ould prevail.
T h e servants o f the people w ou ld then concern them selves m ore in bringing
about the reform s w hich the people desire.
IF
THE
P E O PL E
EE A L L ?
E U LE ,
WHY
D O N 'T
THE
P EO PL E G ET
W HAT
THEY
W ANT?
M r. P resident, “ p opular d istru st o f our leg islative bodies is underm ining the
confidence o f the people in representative governm ent.”
I t is prom oting radical
socialism and developing elem ents o f crim inal anarchy.
I t is developing forces th a t h av e in past history overthrow n Governm ents and
destroyed the existin g order.
T h e people d esire m any th in gs w hich they are entitled to receive, w hich have
been prom ised to them , and w hich h ave been w ithheld or a t lea st not delivered
by their public servants, w h o in reality m ake them selves the m asters o f the
people w hen trusted w ith power.
T h e p e o p le w a n t l o w e r p r ic e s o n t h e n e c e s s a r i e s o f l if e and the reduction o f
th e tariff. W h y d o they not get it? T h ey w ere prom ised reduction, but they
got a higher ta riff and higher prices than before.
W h y d o t h e y n o t y e t r e c ip r o c it y f
I t h a s been repeatedly prom ised in party
p la tform s an d on the hustings.
R e c i p r o c i t y w a s the policy repeatedly declared by B lain e and M cK in ley , and
it w a s again proclaim ed in the R epublican national p la tform o f 1900, upon
w hich M cK in ley and R oosevelt w ere elected, confirm ing the policy upon w hich
the people h ad p reviously trusted the R epublican P arty w ith power.
B u t the R epublican organization in the Senate on M arch 5, 1903, finally
defeated every reciprocity trea ty negotiated under the au th ority o f the “ A ct
to provide revenue for the Governm ent, and to encourage the industries o f the
U n ited S ta tes,” approved July 24, 1897, to w i t : T h e convention w ith France,
subm itted D ecem ber 6, 1899, agreem ent extending tim e to r a t if y ; subm itted
M arch 21, 1 9 0 0 ; again M arch 9, 1 9 0 1 ; D ecem ber 4, 1902, and so forth. Recom
m itted M arch 5, 1903. In lik e m anner w ere sm othered and killed the follow in g
reciprocity tr e a tie s :
T h e convention w ith G reat B ritain , M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; the convention fo r B a r
bados, M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; the convention for B ritish G uiana, M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; the
convention fo r T u rk s and Caicos Islan d s, M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; the convention for
Jam aica, M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; the convention for B erm ud a, M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; the con
vention fo r N ew fou n dlan d, M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; the convention w ith A rgentine
R epublic, M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; th e convention w ith E cuador, M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; the con
vention w ith N icaragu a , M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; the convention w ith D en m ark fo r St.
Croix, M arch 5, 1 9 0 3 ; an d so forth , and so forth.
T h e p e o p le w a n t l o w e r p r ic e s and the reduction o f the tariff.
W h y don’t
they get it? T h ey w ere prom ised reduction, but they got a higher ta riff and
higher prices than before, and sh am efu l “ r e t a l i a t i o n ” Instead o f honorable
“ reciprocity? ”
T h e p e o p le w a n t t h e c o n tr o l o f m o n o p o l y and the reduction o f the high prices
o f monopoly.
W h y don’t they get it?
A ll parties prom ise it, ye t M oody’ s
M an u al show s th a t the gigan tic m onopolies have rapidly grow n until their
stock s and bonds com prise a th ird o f th e national w ealth.
T h e y aggregate
over th irty thousand m illion s o f d ollars. M ood y’s M an u al fo r 1907, page 2330,
gives over 1,000 com panies absorbed or m erged by or into other com panies fo r
1907, and these conditions grow w orse each year.
O rganized m onopoly controls th e m eat m a r k e t; controls the selling price o f
beef, m utton, pork, fo w ls, and every v a rie ty o f m eat.
O rganized m onopoly controls the prices o f all bakery products and candies
and p re se r v e s; controls the p rices o f all canned goods and tropical f r u i t s ; con
tro ls the price o f su gar and salt and spices. M onopolies control everything that
goes on the table, a s food, a s tablew are, china and glas3 w are, and the price
o f the table it s e lf; controls th e price o f everything th a t enters the house, the
fu rn itu re, th e carpets, th e d ra p e ries; controls the price o f everything w orn
upon the back o f m an, o f w oolen goods, o f linen goods, o f silk goods, o f cotton
goods, o f leather goods.
T h e y control th e price o f all m a te ria ls o f w hich buildings
are constructed— lum ber, iron an d steel, cem ent, brick, plaster, m arble, granite,
stone, tile, slate, and asp h alt. T h ey control paper and stationery goods, iron,
copper, and steel and m etals, and goods m ade o f these m aterials.
T h ey con
trol d airy p ro d u cts; they control ra ilw a y s and steam ship lines, telegraph,
telephone, and express com panies.
T h ey control everything needed by m an,
31092— 10612
11
from the cradle w hich receives the baby, and the to y s w ith w hich a child plays,
to the casket and the cerem ents o f the grave.
T h ey have raised prices 50 per cent higher than the m ark ets o f the w orld,
an d their apologists, the political allies o f com m ercial monopoly and their
in tellectu al m ercenaries, fill the public press w ith solemn argum ent about the
qu an titative theory o f m oney and the increase o f gold as exp laining and ju s tify
in g high prices.
T h e w hole w orld is staggering under the high prices o f monopoly, and the
people o f the U n ited S tates are afflicted w ith prices 50 per cent higher than
those paid by the balance o f m ankind. T h e people ask fo r bread and they get
a stone. T h e y ask fo r low er prices and they get a senatorial investigation as
to the causes o f high prices, and the causes o f high prices w hen ascertained by
this unnecessary and absurd research w ill unquestionably be used a s a special
plea and as an apology and p retext for denying the reasonable dem and o f( the
A m erican people fo r the restrain t o f m onopoly and the low ering o f prices.
T h ese high prices m ean th a t it takes $150 to buy w hat $100 bought before
and ou g h t to buy. I t is very h ard on dom estic servants, a ll o f w hom are ask
ing higher w ages.
I t is very hard on people w ith fixed salaries or o f sm all
fixed incom es and ann uities and w ith pensions.
T h e se artificial high prices
m ake the few , the m onopolists, very rich, but they sorely, p ain fu lly ta x the
livin g o f th e poor.
T h is policy i? ju stified neither by com m on sense nor by patriotism .
T h e p e o p le d e m a n d a f a i r p r ic e f o r th e ir c r u d e p r o d u c ts , fo r th eir ca ttle and
hogs and sheep and the corn and h ay and grass fed into these dom estic anim als
and m arketed. T h e B e e f T ru s t artificially fixes the price o f w h at they produce,
w ith ou t com petition, at an u n fair price, and no rem edy is afforded. T he
Tobacco T ru st fixes the price o f their tobacco, and is stirring up the night
riders’ rebellion, w ith its ignorant, crim in al, and p itifu l protests, by stealing
the valu e o f the labor o f the tobacco raiser by artificial prices, and no relief is
given.
T h e th ief uses the sw ord o f the S tate to punish the protest o f its victim who
in blind passion violates the la w o f the Governm ent th a t d oes n ot protect him.
I t is a sorrow fu l sight.
G am blers in the m arket places undertake to force prices o f w heat, corn, oats,
an d cotton back and forth fo r gam blin g purposes, and no relief.
I s it an y w onder th e people abandon the fa rm and find a w orse condition in
the grinding com petition o f labor in our great cities, w here m onopoly again fixes
the price o f lab o r? I s it any w onder labor m akes violent efforts to protect itself
an d to protect the w ives and children who look to them for protection?
IF THE PEOPLE BULE, W H Y DO THEY NOT GET W HAT THEY W AN T?
T h e p e o p le h a v e b e e n p r o m is e d t h e c o n tr o l o f m o n o p o l y .
W h y do they not
get it? A re the people in control o f Governm ent, or are the tru sts in control?
D o the people really ru le?
T h e p e o p le do n o t a p p r o v e b la c k listin g o f e m p l o y e e s by the tariff-protected
m onopolies, y e t they get no relief.
T h e p e o p le d o n o t a p p r o v e t h e g r in d in g d o w n o f w a g e s b y th e p r o t e c t e d
m o n o p o lie s , from w hich brutal policy poverty, crim e, inefficiency, sickness, and
d eath m u st u n avoidably follow .
W H Y DO THEY GET NO BELIEF?
T h e p e o p le d e s ir e an e m p l o y e r s ' l ia b ilit y a c t — eight hours o f labor and one
d ay o f rest in seven and san itary housing for labor. W h y do they not get it?
I s the dem and unreasonable? H a s not the condition at P ittsburgh, the center
o f the great system o f A m erican protection, been fu lly set forth by the highest
au th ority, by the trained experts o f the R u ssell Sage F ound ation?
D id they not point ou t 12 hours o f labor 7 d a y s in the w eek a s the usual rule,
im pure w ater, im pure food, in san itary housing, sick w om en and children? D oes
not the recent report o f the D ep artm en t o f Com m erce and L ab or o f the B eth le
hem Co. confirm it ? W h y is there no re lie f from these hideous conditions o f
A m erican life ?
T h e p e o p le d o n o t a p p r o v e 1 2 h o u r s o f la b o r f o r 7 d a y s in t h e w e e k th a t m akes
o f m an a p itifu l beast o f burden and destroys his efficiency and life. T h e Sage
Foundation pointed ou t these tragical conditions a t P ittsburgh, as I have here
to fo re pointed ou t to the S e n a te ; the D ep artm ent o f Com m erce an d L ab or has
31092— 10612
12
reported to tlie Senate a like condition a t the Bethlehem Steel W o rk s, in answ er
to a resolution o f the Senate offered by me.
W h y is there no relief or attem p t a t re lie f?
T h e part w hich the U nited States Steel Corporation has played in prom oting
political cam paigns is an open secret and fu rn ish es one o f the obvious reasons
w hy relief is not afforded.
T h e p e o p le w o u l d lik e p u b li c it y o f c a m p a ig n c o n tr ib u tio n s , a n d a th o r o u g h
g o in g c o r r u p t-p r a c tic e s a c t.
W h y do they not get it?
W h o is interested in m ain tain in g the corrupt practices? D o not the people
desii’e corrupt practices stopped?
W h o opposes publicity o f cam paign contributions? D o not the people wish
publicity o f cam paign contributions and effective control o f the use o f money in
cam paigns?
T h e p e o p le d e s ir e to c o n tr o l g a m b lin g in a g r ic u ltu ra l p r o d u c ts .
W h o is con
cerned in m ain tain in g th is evil system o f gam bling in w heat and corn and oats
and rye an d cotton ? D o the people d esire this gam bling to continue, and w ould
it continue under th e ru le o f the people?
T h e people despise the legislative treachery o f the so-called “ jok er ” in their
law s w hich d efe a ts the im plied prom ise o f relief in the law .
W h e n the people
rule, th is leg islative trickery w ill cease.
Oh, it is said, M r. President, th a t the people do not know w h at they w ant
nor how to govern them selves directly, but only by representatives.
I e m p h a tic a lly d e n y it.
T h e d e m o n s tr a tio n in O r e g o n is a fina l a n s w e r to
s u c h s h a llo w p r e t e n s e s .
I confess for the m ost p art they are an unorganized
mob in p o litic s; th a t fo r m any years they have trusted political parties, m an
aged by m achine m eth o d s; that they do not select candidates or issu e s; but
Oregon and O klahom a point a new and sa fe w ay to correct this deficiency.
T h e p e o p le w i s h t h e g a m b lin g in s to c k s a n d bo n d s to be term inated.
W hy
does th e Senate not act?
W h y does not the Congress act and forbid the m ails
to the m ost gigan tic and w icked gam blin g scheme the w orld h as ever know n—
a gigantic sponge w hich absorbs by stealth an d c r a ft hundreds o f m illions
ann u ally from foolish tru stin g citizens, m isled b y fa lse appeals to their avarice,
cupidity, and speculative w eaknesses, d erisively called “ the lam bs,” w ho pass
in an unbroken stream to slaughter on the fascin a tin g a lta rs o f mammon.
W h y a r e t h e r e s e r v e s o f t h e n a tio n a l b a n k s n o t u s e d e x c l u s i v e l y f o r c o m
m e r c e , but used instead a s an agency o f stock gam bling and overcertification
o f checks a s a ch ief a u x ilia r y ?
I tried m y best in the Senate when the financial
bill w a s pending in 1908 to am end th is evil condition, but the Senate w ill rem em
ber the d enial o f th at relief.
W h y is there no control o f o v e r c a p it a liz a t io n o f the o v e r i s s u e o f s to c k s and
b o n d s o f c o r p o r a tio n s , another m eans by w hich the people are defraud ed ?
W h y is there n o e f f e c t i v e c o n tr o l o f ra ilr o a d , p a s s e n g e r , a n d f r e i g h t r a te s
a fte r 4 0 years a g ita tio n ? . D o th e people w an t reasonable railroad rates, or
do the people conduct the Governm ent o f the U nited S tates?
T h e present discussion o f railroad fre ig h t rates on the floor o f the Senate and
on th e floor o f the H o u se is alm ost entirely in vain, because the ju r y is not a
ju r y in sym path y w ith th e people, but a ju r y that, m ost unfortunately, u n d er
m a c h in e ru le , can not be free from the influence o f the enorm ous power o f the
railroad s in politics.
T h e debate is w ell-nigh useless, and fo r th is reason w ill
am ount to nothing in the w a y o f su bstantial relief to the A m erican people,
except to d efe a t a sk illfu l raid planned again st the people under color o f serv
ing them .
W h y is th ere n o a d e q u a te c o n tr o l o f t h e d is c r im in a tio n o f r a ilw a y s against
individuals, or d iscrim in ation s in fa v o r o f one com m unity a g a in st another?
T h e people are opposed to these discrim inations, but th eir representatives— the
party lead ers w ho are in power— do not adequately represent the reasonable de
sires o f the people.
W h y i s t h e r e n o p h y s ic a l v a lu a tio n o f r a i lw a y s — giving the ra ilw a y com panies
generous consideration o f every valu e they are entitled to— a s a basis o f honest
freigh t and passenger ra tes?
T h e In terstate Com m erce Com m ission has re
peatedly advised us that it w a s essential and necessary, but yet there h as been
no response from the authorized representatives o f the people.
IF THE PEOPLE RULE, W H Y DO TH EY NOT GET W H A T TH EY ARE ENTITLED TO?
W h y is t h e r e n o p a rc e l p o s t f
W o u ld it serve the interest o f the people and
protect the deficit o f th e P ost Office D ep artm en t?
U ndoubtedly.
B ut the
31092— 10612
13
great express com panies have such political power w ith the dom inant repre
sentatives o f the people th at the dom inant representatives do not ju stly repre
sent the people, but represent instead those w ho contribute money and influence
secretly to cam paign funds.
W h y do w e not have a n a tio n a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f g o o d r o a d s, cooperating w ith
every S tate and county in the U n ion ?
T h e people undoubtedly w an t it and undoubtedly need it.
W h y do w e not have a s y s t e m a t i c d e v e lo p m e n t o f o u r n a tio n a l w a t e r w a y s f
T h e people w an t that, bu t the recent rivers and harbors w ill, appropriating
fifty-tw o m illions, spent m an y m illions on local projects w ith political prestige,
but w ith ou t a thoroughgoing n ational design.
T h e people desired a p u r e foo d , a n d d ru g a c t, and it took a long tim e to get
it, and it s a d m in is tr a tio n n o w is m a d e a lm o s t im p o s s i b l e b y t h e in flu e n c e s o v e r
g o v e r n m e n t o f s e l f-p r o m o t i n g c o m m e r c ia l in t e r e s ts .
W h y is e q u a l it y o f o p p o r t u n i t y being rapidly destroyed and absorbed by cor
porate grow th and power w ith ou t an y protection o f the young men and o f the
you n g w om en an d people o f the lan d ? D o the people w an t equality o f oppor
tu n ity? W a s it not prom ised in the R epublican p la tform ?
T h e p e o p le u n i v e r s a l ly d e s ir e a n i n c o m e ta x .
I t w as defeated in the Supreme
Court by a fallacio u s argum ent, w hich I have heretofore pointed out, and w ill
probably be defeated a s a constitutional am endm ent because o f m achine rule
and the influence o f private interest w ith m achine rule, w hich is m ore potential
than the public w elfare.
W h y do th e p e o p le n o t g e t a p r o g r e s s i v e in h e r it a n c e t a x on the gigantic fo r
tunes o f A m erica ? T h e people w an t it. E very nation in E urope h as it, even
under m onarchies, a s I have heretofore shown, w ith the m ost exact particulars.
Com m on honesty and fairn ess dem ands it, its constitutionality is affirmed by
the highest courts, and it w ould not offend the feelings o f the m ost avaricious
m u ltim illion aire a t the tim e o f its enforcem ent— a fter he w as dead.
W h y do w e w a i t s o lo n g f o r th e a d m is s io n o f A r iz o n a a n d N e w M e x i c o f
F or
years it h as been p ro m ise d ; fo r years those people have w aited upon the ad
m in istration o f ju stice by the C ongress o f the U nited States.
F in ally, M r. President, w h y do w e n o t h a v e e le c tio n o f S e n a t o r s b y d ir e c t v o t e
o f th e p e o p l e t
T h e elected representatives o f the people in fo u r preceding Con
gresses have, by a vote su bstan tially unanim ous, favo red and passed resolu
tions fo r th is purpose. D id they represent the people o f the U n ited S tates?
T h irty-seven S tates now stand fo r it. D o they represent the people o f the
U nited S tates? A ll the great nonpartisan organizations o f the country, the
A m erican Federation o f Labor, the Society o f E quity, the N a tio n al Grange, the
F arm ers’ E du cation al and Cooperative Union, and every one of the great p oliti
cal parties w ith the exception o f the dom in ant party, in its national p la tform ,
and even here a m a jo rity, a great m a jo rity, o f Republican S tates fa v o r it and
have so expressed them selves, and yet no action. N ine-tenths o f the .people
w an t it, and the Senate o f the U n ited S tates d efeats it, and the Senator from
Idaho [M r. H e y b u r n ] am uses the Senate by calling this m ature ju d gm en t o f
the A m erican people “ popular clam or.”
I t is enough to m ake the Senate laugh,
this m irth-provoking “ popular clam or,” evidenced by the insane legislatu res of
Idaho and K entucky.
It is w rong to inquire—
DO T H E
PEOPLE
RULE?
E veryth in g th at they stan d for and desire is defeated. A ll o f the great doc
trines th at they have been urging forw ard are obstructed. Some o f the R epub
lican leaders say, “ Y e s : the people ru le through the Republican P a rty .”
My
an sw er is, M r. President, th at i f th e p e o p le ru led th ro u g h th e R e p u b lic a n P a r t y ,
t h e y w o u l d h a v e lo n g s in c e a n s w e r e d th e ir o w n p r a y e r s and d e m a n d s f a v o r a b l y
a n d n o t d e n ie d t h e m s e l v e s th e ir o w n p e titio n s .
M r. P resident, the evils w hich have crept into our Governm ent have grow n up
n atu ra lly under the convention system , not through the fa u lts o f any particular
m an or any particu lar party.
I believe in the integrity o f the great body o f the
Republican citizens of this country, but I have little patience w ith pure m achine
politics guided by selfish interests in either party. T h e system o f delegated
governm ent affords too open and abundant opportunity fo r com m ercialism and
for mere self-seeking political am bition.
It h as seized upon the party in power, a s it a lw a y s seeks to do w ith the party
that c a n d e liv e r , and it w ill be a task o f enorm ous diflSculty to purge the party
31092— 10612
14
in pow er o f these dangerous and sinister forces, if, indeed, it do not prove
utterly im possible except by its retirem ent from power.
In som e cases delegated governm ent, even under a m achine form , is per
fe c tly upright, perfectly honest, and serves the cause o f the people excellently
w ell, but the m echanism o f governm ent by the delegate plan afford s too great
opportunity fo r the allian ce o f com m ercialism and political am bition.
An
ordinary State convention, under the m achine-rule plan, is composed o f dele
gates delegated from county co n ven tio n s; the county conventions consist o f
delegates delegated from the w ard p r im a r y ; the w ard p rim a ry consists o f a
w ard boss, a bouncer or tw o, and a crow d o f strikers who do not represent
the actu al m em bership o f the p arty voters o f that w ard, so th a t when a
Senator is nom inated by a S tate convention he is often three degrees removed
from the people, an d is the choice o f a m achine and does not really feel fu lly
his d u ty to th e in articu late m ass.
I t w ill be better fo r th is country w hen Senators and M em bers o f Congress
an d S ta te leg islato rs and m unicipal leg islato rs are chosen by the direct vote
o f the people and when the people h ave the right o f recall by the nom ination
o f a successor to their public servants.
T h e people w ill never abuse their
power.
The great political need in the United States is the establishment of the
direct rule of the people, the overthrow of machine politics, the overthrow of
corrupt or unwise use of money, intimidation, coercion, bribery; the overthrow
o f the variou s cr a fty corporate an d political devices w hich have heretofore
succeeded in n u llify in g th e w ill o f the people.
T h e great issue is to restore the direct rule o f the people a s m em bers o f
parties and w ith in both parties, and to abate the m align influence o f m achine
methods.
T h e great issue is to enable the m em bers o f the R epublican P arty to control
it, to provide a mechanism by which the members of the Republican Party,
fo r exam ple, can really nominate their own candidates for public office and
for party office, and then require their elected representatives to represent the
people w ho elect them and m ake effective the w ill o f the p arty m em bers who
have nom inated and elected them.
T h e great issue is to enable the m em bers o f the D em ocratic P arty to directly
nominate their own candidates, both in the party itself and for public office,
and then require such public servan ts so nom inated and elected to represent the
people w ho nom inated and elected them under p enalty o f the recall or under
the safegu a rd s o f the in itiative an d referendum .
A ll th e people now have is the power to d efe a t on election d ay a bad candi
date, and thus th ey exercise some influence over nom inations. T h e people do
not in reality rule.
T h e people appear to ru le through the present m achinery o f p arty govern
ment, but they do not ru le in fa ct, because the party m achinery is so largely
in the h an ds o f m achine men, is so largely controlled in the interest o f the few
an d again st the interest o f th e m a n y ; because the present m echanism o f party
m anagem ent is so contrived as to largely exclude au tom a tically th e cooperation
o f the great body o f the m em bers o f the party, and is so contrived as to cause
the party power to fa ll by g rav ity into the hands o f p rofessional m anagers.
T h e rem edy fo r th ese evils is to restore the governm ent o f the people and to
m o d ify the presen t m echanism o f p arty governm ent, so the party m em bers m ay
conveniently control, th eir own party.
In order to accom plish th is there m u st be—
F irst. An honest and effective registration law.
Second. An honest and effective ballot law.
T h ird. A direct primary laic, properly safeguard ed , by w hich candidates fo r
public office an d fo r p arty office m a y be d irectly and sa fe ly nom inated.
F ourth. Constitutional an d statutory lanes providing the initiative and ref
erendum, by w hich the people m a y directly legislate, i f the legislatu re fa il,
and m ay d irectly exercise the veto power over an act o f their representatives
in the legislatu re i f a la w is passed they do not w ant.
F ifth . A thoroughgoing corrupt-practices act, forb id ding election rascalities,
prohibiting the use o f m oney, and providing fu ll publicity.
S ixth . An act providing for the publicity pamphlet, giving the argum ents for
and ag ain st every m easure, the argu m en t fo r and ag ain st every candidate, and
p u ttin g this p am phlet in the han ds o f every citizen b efore each election fo r M s
in form ation and guidance.
31092— 10612
15
Seventh. T h e r ig h t o f r e c a ll.
In order to get re lie f from the evils, a fe w o f w hich I have tried to point out,
these im portant statu tes m u st be w ritten on the statute books o f every State,
and the m achine m u st n ot be allow ed to fill them fu ll o f “ jo k e rs.”
T h e m a c h in e
m u s t n o t he a llo w e d to c h a n g e a w o r d o f t h e s e la w s th a t d o e s n o t s ta n d t h e
a p p r o v a l o f t h e f r i e n d s o f t h e r u le o f t h e p e o p le .
In order to h ave these la w s passed by the S tate legislatures, e v e r y c a n d id a te
f o r m e m b e r s h ip in t h e l e g is la tu r e s h o u ld he q u e s tio n e d and h is w ritten answ er
dem anded by authorized com m ittees o f the people— com m ittees p artisan and
nonpartisan, com m ittees R epublican an d D em ocratic, com m ittees o f all parties,
com m ittees o f the A m erican F ederation o f Labor, o f the F arm ers’ U nion, o f the
Grange, an d o f other organ ization s o f fre e men, operating together w henever
convenient.
T h e can didates fo r the leg islatu re w ho refu se to agree to support cord ially the
leg islative program o f the people’ s ru le deserve to be defeated a s they w ere
d efeated in O klahom a in th e cam paign fo r the constitutional convention in 1906.
Question the candidates on th e people’s rule.
N o candidate can expect, or ought to expect, the vote o f the people w hen he
defies the righ t o f th e people to rule.
T h e D em ocratic P arty inscribed on its banners in the la st national p la tform
the doctrine o f th e people’s rule, and I do hope all D em o cra ts w ill do w h a t they
can to m a k e effective the p latform declaration by concrete law s.
T h e enem ies o f the people’s ru le obscurely discourse about d estroying repre
sen tative governm ent. N obody should be deceived fo r a m om ent by th is
illogical, unreasonable, unfounded, and u tterly absurd pretension. I t is the
argu m en t o f the m achine an d should brand the proponent a s an enem y o f
popular gbvernment.
M y representative represents m e best w hen he receives m y instruction and
when I retain the righ t to in stru ct him and to recall him and to act inde
pendently o f him i f necessary.
I firm ly believe in representative go vern m en t
T h ose w ho stand fo r the people’s ru le program believe in representative gov
ernment.
I t is representative governm ent they w ant.
I t is representative governm ent they dem and.
I t is representative governm ent they in sist on.
T h e end o f m isrepresentative, corrupt m achine governm ent Is the corollary o f
th is dem and an d its necessary complement.
I tru st to see th e tim e come, M r. President, when the citizen can vo te w ith fu ll
know ledge an d by secret postal ballot, to be counted at S tate headquarters and
registered w ith th e sam e certain ty, secrecy, and security th a t h is check w ould
be registered in a bank office, w ith o u t cost, w ithout inconvenience, and a t his
leisure.
O nly by the overthrow o f corruption in politics and by the elim ination o f the
sinister influences o f com m ercialism w ill the people o f the country ever be able
to consider disp assion ately the great m atters o f public policy w hich are so essen
tia l to their fu tu re developm ent and w elfare. W h en w e shall have purged our
G overnm ent o f dishonest m ethods and have provided a m eans by w hich the
people can intelligently and hon estly r u le ; w h e n w e sh a ll h a v e p r o v id e d a
m e c h a n is m h y w h ic h t h e p e o p le ca n a u t h o r it a t i v e l y e x p r e s s t h e m s e l v e s , t h e y w ill
v o t e f o r u n iv ersa l p ea ce.
T h e p e o p le o f t h e U n ite d S t a t e s t o -d a y , i f t h e y c o u ld
v o t e o n t h e q u e s tio n o f in te r n a tio n a l p e a c e , on t h e q u e s t io n o f lim itin g t h e a r m a
m e n t o f n a tio n s , w o u l d h e a r t il y h e in f a v o r o f i t .
T h e p e o p le o f G e r m a n y w o u l d
v o t e th e s a m e w a y .
T h e p e o p le o f G r e a t B r i t a i n w o u ld v o t e t h e s a m e w a y .
T h e danger o f w ar arises n ot fro m the people, bu t from am bitious leaders,
an x iou s fo r activity, an x iou s for service, an xious fo r promotion. T h e dogs of
w ar in every n ation are an x iou s to fight, and com m ercial interests engaged in
fu rn ish in g the m unim ents o f w ar, in fu rn ish in g m aterial fo r building ba ttle
ships, fill the press w ith ru m ors o f w ar w hen the naval appropriation is before
Congress, and th ese th in gs tend to irritate n ations w ith each other.
T h e in tern ation al m isch ief-m ak ers, w ho prate too m uch about the excessive
delicacies o f qu estion s o f n ation al honor that can only be settled b y th e arb itra
m ent o f w ar, should be stern ly suppressed and w ould be rendered pow erless
for harm under th e ru le o f the people.
I f th e p e o p le c o u ld e x p r e s s t h e m s e l v e s , t h e y w o u ld i m m e d i a t e l y v o t e f o r g o o d
r o a d s , im p r o v e d w a t e r w a y s , w h o l e s a l e e d u c a tio n , e ig h t h o u rs o f la b o r , i m p r o v e d
31092—10612
16
p r o t e c t io n o f t h e p u b lic h e a lth , l o w e r p r ic e s , r e a s o n a b le c o n tr o l o f p u b li c -u t i li t y
c o r p o r a tio n s , r e a s o n a b le f r e i g h t r a t e s , r e a s o n a b le r a te s b y e x p r e s s , te le p h o n e ,
and t e le g r a p h , t h e r ig h t o f d ir e c t le g is la tio n , a n d to c o n tr o l th e ir p u b lic s e r v a n ts .
M r. President, the citizens o f th e great R epublic w a it in vain for substantial
relief, w h ile m achine p oliticians in S tate and m unicip alities grow l a t each
o th er; but the D em ocrats an d R epublicans a t hom e and men o f a ll opinions
are robbed w ith perfect im p artia lity by the organized m onopolies and trade
conspiracies o f th is country. I a m un w illin g to see the people w a it an y longer.
M r. President, the people’ s ru le is th e only w a y to end political corruption,
and I am rejoiced to see th e great A m erican press giving the question o f the
new system o f governm ent vigorous attention.
W it h the activ e help o f the
new spaper men o f the "United S tates th is system w ill be in control o f the U nited
S tates in tw o and a h a lf years.
T h e new spaper men w ho appreciate the gradual closing o f the d oors o f op
portu n ity fo r you n g men by th e gigantic grow th o f m onopoly w ill stand for
the ru le o f th e people, a s the doctrine o f organized righteousness and as th e
s o u n d e s t s a fe g u a r d o f p r o p e r t y r ig h ts a s w ell as o f hum an rights.
U n restrain ed organized greed can not oppress hum an beings too fa r w ithout
exp losive consequences o f far-reach in g .danger to property rights.
T h e com pilation o f law s, w ith exp lan atory notes, w hich I have subm itted a s
a Senate docum ent, looks to the restoration o f the rule o f the people o f the
U n ited S ta te s ; an d w hen I say people, I m ean the rule o f th e Republican
people, th e D em ocratic people, th e independent people, th e Socialist people, and
the P opu list people. A n d , M r. P resident, I ask th a t it be printed as a Senate
docum ent.
[S . D oc. No. 603.]
T h e P R E S I D I N G O F F I C E R (M r . K e a n in the c h a ir ). T he C hair hears no
objection to th e request o f the Senator from Oklahom a.
M r. O W E N . A t present these people do not r u le ; they only think they rule.
T h ey are, in fact, ruled by an allian ce betw een special com m ercial interests, at
the head o f w hich is the great political trade com bination known as the P ro
tective T a r iff L eagu e and a great political m achine w hose nam e I need not
m ention in th is presence.
M r. P resident, the Senator from Oregon h a s heretofore set up in the clearest
possible m anner, in h is m ost n otable an d va lu able speech o f M ay the 5th, the
system o f the people’s rule o f Oregon. I w ish to give it m y cordial approval
and to say w ith the adoption o f th is m ethod th e people o f the U nited States
can relieve them selves in very great m easure, if not entirely, o f the sinister
influences to w hich bad governm ent in th is country is directly due.
PROGRESS OF SYSTEM.
M r. President, as one o f the steps to the restoration o f the people’s rule I
call to the attention o f th e Senate Senate jo in t resolution No. 41, providing for
the subm ission to the S tates o f the U nion o f a constitutional am endm ent pro
viding fo r the election o f Senators by direct vote o f the people, and m ove that
th e C om m ittee on P rivileges and E lections be instructed to report the same
a t the first d a y o f the n ext session o f th is Congress, w hich w ill give the com
m ittee abundant tu n e ; and on th is m otion I ca ll fo r the ye a s and n ays.
(M y
m otion talked to death. R . L. O .)
310 9 2 — 10612
o
■
->
- - ...
Senator O w e n defends the principles of the constitution of Okla
homa— the initiative and the referendum— against the assault of the
Senator from Utah [Mr. S u t h e r l a n d ] ,
REMARKS
OF
II ON. R O B E R T
L. O W E N .
The Senate having under consideration the joint resolution (IT. T.
Res. 14) to admit the Territories of New Mexico and Arizona as States
into the Union upon an equal footing with the original States—
M r. O W E N s a i d :
M r. P r e s i d e n t : O h July 11 the Senator from U tah [M r. S u t h
e r l a n d ] fiercely denounced the initiative and the referendum
o f the A rizon a constitution as “ w ild and visionary,” “ utterly
vicious and im practicable,” and so forth.
A t the sam e tim e the Senator from U tah criticized the com
posite citizenship o f Oklahom a, the constitution o f O klahom a,
and the Senator from Oklahom a. H e denounced those who be
lieve in these doctrines as “ quacks in politics,” as “ self-con
stituted reform ers,” as “ self-constituted guardians o f the peo
ple's
rights,”
as
“ visionaries,”
“ dream ers,”
“ agita tors,”
“ dem agogues,” “ political zealots,” “ fa lse pilots or arrant
knaves,” and so forth.
In answ er to these epithets, apparently addressed to those
who, like m yself, believe in these doctrines, I m ake no response,
except to say that abuse is often “ the refuge o f defeated argu
m ent.”
T h e argum ents in favo r o f the in itiative and referendum I
presented on the floor of the Senate in discussing the admission
o f Nevada on M arch 4, 1911, and I shall not repeat them here.
T h e Senators from Oregon [M r. B o u r n e and M r. C h a m b e r
l a i n ] and the Senator from C aliforn ia have exhausted the ar
gum ent in its support, and I do not care to consume the tim e of
the Senate w ith repeating it.
The astonishing thing about the diatribe o f the Senator from
U tah is that he is denouncing the principles o f the constitu
tion o f U tah, w hich provides fo r the initiative, the referendum,
and the recall.
T h e constitution of U tah provides as fo llo w s:
A r t . 6, Sec . 1. The legislative power of the State shall he vested :
1. In a senate and house of representatives, which shall he desig
nated the Legislature of the State of Utah.
2. In the people of the State of Utah, as hereinafter stated :
The legal voters, or such fractional part thereof of the State of Utah
as may be provided by law, under such conditions and in such manner
and within such time as may be provided by law, may initiate [initia
tive] any desired legislation and cayse the same to be submitted to a
vote of the people for approval or rejection, or may require any law
passed by the legislature (except those laws passed by two-thirds vote
of the members elected to each house of the legislature) to be submitted
to the voters of the State before such law shall take effect.
[Refer
endum.]
The legal voters, or such fractional part thereof as may be provided
by law, of any legal subdivision of the State, under such conditions and
in such manner and within such time as may be provided by law, may
initiate any desired legislation and cause the same to be submitted to
a vote of the people of said legal subdivision for approval or rejection,
5448— 10271
3
4
or may require any law or ordinance passed by the law-making body
o f said legal subdivision to be submitted to the voters thereof before
such law or ordinance shall take effect.
(A s amended Nov. 6, 1900.)
A rt . 8, S e c . 1 1 : J u d ges m ay be rem o v ed from office by th e co n c u r r e n t
v ote of both houses of the legislature, each voting s e p a r a te l y ; but twothirds of the members to which each house may be entitled must concur
in such vote. The vote shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the
names of the members voting for or against a judge, together with the
cause or causes of removal, shall be entered on the journal of each
house.
The judge against whom the house may be about to proceed
shall receive notice thereof, accompanied with a copy of the cause
alleged for his removal, at least 10 days before the day on which either
house of the legislature shall act thereon.
Mr. President, here we find in the constitution o f Utah the
initiative, the referendum, and the recall, and we find the honor
able Senator from Utah [Mr. S u t h e r l a n d ] , holding the honors
and dignities of the people o f that State,-denouncing the prin
ciples laid down in the constitution of his own State.
Nothing could induce me to do such a thing, but I do not
attempt to reproach the Senator from Utah for his conduct in
the matter for the reason that I can not believe that he realized
the impropriety of such an act or that he is aware of the bias
of liis own mind which leads him to such conduct.
I believe that the point o f view of the Senator from Utah can
only be explained by the fact that he gives voice to the peculiar
forces outside of the constitution of Utah which hold the organic
law of Utah in contempt and which have defeated “ the perma
nent will o f the people” of that State as expressed in their
organic law for the last 1 0 years.
The Senator from Utah quotes Prof. Stimson as admirably
stating:
The constitution is the permanent will of the people; the law is but
the temporary act of their representatives, who have only such power
as the people choose to give them.
The Senator from Utah used this language, but it is obvious
that he has entirely forgotten what “ the permanent will of the
people ” of Utah happens to be on this vital issue of self-govern
ment—the initiative, the referendum, and the recall.
For. five successive legislatures in Utah the so-called “ repre
sentatives of the people ” have refused to enact the statute law
needed to vitalize the provisions of the Utah constitution and
make effective the initiative and the referendum. What kind of
“ representative ” government is this that we have in Utah,
where “ the permanent will of the people ” is thus ignored by
their so-called “ representatives ” in the legislature, and where
the Senator from Utah, representing that great State and hold
ing its honors and its dignities, ridicules and derides and holds
up to public scorn the constitutional provisions o f his own
State?
We must inquire into this peculiar and extraordinary situa
tion. My just observation that the Constitution o f the United
States as framed was not sufficiently democratic induces the
Senator from Utah to ridicule the manners of the Senator from
Oklahoma and to suggest that he should be prosecuted for omnis
cience for making this ludicrous discovery.
In view o f the distinction of the critic and the public charge
that the Senator from Utah was a recent candidate for the
Supreme Bench o f the United States, it becomes necessary to
justify the observation made by the Senator from Oklahoma
5448— 10271 •
that the Constitution as framed was not democratic. I shall
do this with great brevity.
First. The Constitution permitted a life President.
Second. The Constitution did not provide for the nomination
or election of the President by the people, but by electors far
removed from the people.
Third. The Constitution did not provide for the nomination
or election of Senators by the people.
Fourth. The Constitution provided for an uncontrolled judi
ciary, in striking contrast to the laws o f every State in the
Union, including Utah.
Fifth. A minority of the House can prevent the majority
proposing an amendment to the Constitution. A minority of
the Senate can prevent the majority proposing an amendment to
the Constitution. A President can prevent a majority of both
Houses proposing an amendment to the Constitution. A small
minority of the States can prevent the amendment o f the Con
stitution.
Sixth. No provision for the adoption of the Constitution was
arranged by popular vote.
And some of the delegates who approved the Constitution from
Virginia at least disobeyed the instructions of the people.
Seventh. The Constitutional Convention usurped the power
in framing the Constitution.
They were only authorized to prepare amendments to the
Articles of Confederation, not frame a new Constitution.
Eighth. The Constitution did not protect the right of free
speech.
Ninth. The Constitution did not protect the right o f free
religion.
Tenth. It did not protect the freedom of the press.
Eleventh. It did not protect the right o f the people to peace
ably assemble.
Twelfth. It did not protect the right of the people to petition
the Government for the righting of grievances.
Thirteenth. It did not protect the right of the States to have
troops.
Fourteenth. It did not protect the right of the people to
keep and bear arms.
Fifteenth. It did not protect the people against the quartering
of soldiers upon them without their consent.
Sixteenth. It did not protect the right of the people to be
secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures nor against warrants, ex
cept upon suitable safeguards.
Seventeenth. It did not protect the people against being held
for crime, except on indictment.
Eighteenth. It did not protect the people against a second
trial for the same offense.
Nineteenth. It did not protect an accused against being com
pelled to be a witness against himself.
Twentieth. It did not protect the citizen against being de
prived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
Twenty-first. It did not protect private property being taken
for public use without just compensation.
G 448— 1 0 2 7 1
6
Twenty-second. It did not secure, in criminal prosecutions,
the right of a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury in
the place where the crime was committed.
Twenty-third. It did not protect the accused in the right to
be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, of the
right to be confronted with the witnesses against him, of the
right to have compulsory processes in obtaining witnesses in
his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel in his defense.
Twenty-fourth. It did not protect the right of the. citizen in
common lawsuits to a trial by jury.
Twenty-fifth. It did not protect the citizen against excessive
bail, against excessive fines, nor against cruel and unusual
punishments.
Twenty-sixth. It did not safeguard the rights reserved by
the people against invasion by the Federal Government.
The Constitutional Convention was a secret conclave, no
member being allowed to report or copy any of its proceedings,
which were kept a profound secret for 50 years, until all the
actors were dead. The membership of the Constitutional Con
vention was notoriously conservative, consisting of such men
as Elbridge Gerry, who declared “ that democracy was the
worst of all political evils.” (Elliot’s Debates, vol. 5, p. 557.)
Edmund Randolph observed that, in tracing the political
evils of this country to their origin, “ every man (in the conven
tion) had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”
Madison thought the Constitution “ ought to secure the per
manent interests of the country against innovation.” (Elliot’s
Debates, vol. 1, p. 450.)
Hamilton urged a permanent Senate “ to check the impru
dence of democracy.”
Gouvemeur Morris urged a life Senate, saying “ such an aris
tocratic body will keep down the turbulence of democracy.”
Madison, in the Federalist, warned the people against “ the
superior force of an interested and overbearing majority,” and
so forth.
Twenty-seventh. The Constitution is undemocratic in making
no provision for its adoption or subsequent amendment by direct
popular vote, although this was the method of the various
States.
The Constitution is undemocratic, as I have shown, in omit
ting a bill of rights and the great fundamental principles con
tained in the Declaration of Independence.
James Allen Smith, professor of political science, University
of Washington, well says:
From all evidence that we have the conclusion Is Irresistible that
they sought to establish a form of government which would effectually
curb and restrain democracy.
They engrafted upon the Constitution
so much of the features of popular government as was, in their opinion,
sufficient to insure its adoption.
The convention of July 4, 1776, was thoroughly democratic,
as is the Declaration o f Independence.
The Constitution of the United States was made thoroughly
undemocratic by a thoroughly reactionary convention, leading
Democrats being absent, such as Thomas Jefferson, Samuel
Adams, Patrick Henry, and so forth. Only 11 States voted for
its adoption. Only 55 members out of 65 attended and only 39
members signed it. Its ratification was only secured with the
greatest difiiculty, and in no States was it submitted to a vote
5443— 10271
7
of tlie people themselves. Massachusetts, South Carolina, New
Hampshire, Virginia, and New York demanded amendments,
and North Carolina and Ithode Island at first rejected the Con
stitution, and except for the agreement to adopt the first 1 0
amendments and make it more democratic it would have as
suredly failed.
George Washington, as President of the Convention, was de
barred from sharing in the debates. It had one very great
merit—it established the Union. It had one great demerit— it
was not democratic.
If a knowledge of the Constitution be a prerequisite to qualify
a citizen or a Senator as a candidate for the Supreme Court of
the United States, then, with great respect, I humbly submit
that the Senator from Utah has not qualified under the rule.
Certainly he is not justified in attempting to ridicule the sug
gestion that the Constitution was not democratic.
All democratic constitutions are flexible and easy to amend.
This
follows from the fact that in a government which the people really
control the constitution is merely the means of securing the supremacy
of public opinion and not an instrument for thwarting it.
* *
*
A government is democratic just in proportion as it responds to the
will of the people, and since one way of defeating the will of the people
is to make it difficult to alter the form of government, it necessarily
follows that any constitution which is democratic in spirit must yield
readily to changes in public opinion. (Spirit of American Government.)
An unamendable constitution and a judiciary not responsible
to the people is dangerous to the stability of government. When
public opinion becomes greatly aroused and can find no expres
sion through the constitution, and the judiciary, as a ruling
power, obstructs such public opinion, it may easily lead to revo
lution and to war. as it did do when the Supreme Court of the
United States, by the Dred Scott decision, nationalized slavery,
and the Constitution not being amendable by the majority left
no apparent remedy but the dissolution of the Union or war.
The Federal court now vetoes acts of Congress and nullifies
national policies, such as the control of the trusts or an income
tax or other benevolent laws passed in recent years for the
protection of the humbler working masses.
The judicial branch can nullify the acts of the legislative
branch, although the Constitutional Convention, reactionary
though it was, four times refused to grant the right to the
Supreme Court to declare an act of Congress unconstitutional.
The Constitution, as drawn, was intended to give a veto to
the minority, and to restrain the majority, for the benefit of the
minority, and, in plain words, benefit the so-called vested inter
ests, property rights, and special privilege.
The glowing terms of praise which we now hear from the
Senator from Utah [Mr. S u t h e r l a n d ] of an unamendable con
stitution, and of a judiciary not responsible to the people, has
been the language of special privilege and of the advocates of
minority rule and of commercial and political oligarchies since
the day this Constitution was framed. It seems an amazing
thing that the Senator from Utah should denounce the initiative,
the referendum, and the recall, provided for in his own con
stitution. These are the tools of Democracy. The initiative,
the referendum, and the recall are the sword and buckler of the
majority. It arms the majority with power and puts the Gov
ernment in the hands of the people.
5448— 10271
Mr. President, by the initiative, the people may initiate any
law they do want; and, by the referendum, they may veto any
law they do not w ant; and, by the recall, they can remove from
office any officia-l for inefficiency.
I shall not reproach the Senator from Utah for his strange
bias, for his point of view that denounces the principles of the
constitution of Utah and incidentally denounces the principles
of the constitution o f Oklahoma; nor would I answer him and
his criticisms at all did I not deem it of vast importance to the
people of the United States that the mechanism of self-govern
ment should be adopted and should not be defeated by the
Senator from Utah and those who stand with him.
It is a very significant fact that the Western Newspaper
Union is sending out printed plates of this speech against the
initiative and referendum and the recall. Who is paying the
bills for that tremendous expense? These bills do not pay
themselves; somebody is paying a large amount of money to
publish these plates which the Western Newspaper Union seem
to be furnishing gratis to the country newspapers in Minnesota,
in Oklahoma, and everywhere else. It is not a pleasing thing
to the Senator from Oklahoma to hear of the press of the
country using these plates denouncing the principles o f the
constitution of Oklahoma and ridiculing the Senator from
Oklahoma. The vindication of the opinions of the people and
of the constitution o f Oklahoma makes an answer unavoidable.
Mr. REED. Mr. President-----The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Missouri?
Mr. OWEN. I do.
Mr. REED. Would the Senator from Oklahoma give us some
idea of about how much it would cost to furnish these plates
to the country press of the United States?
Mr. OWEN. I do not know what the expense would be, but
it would be enormous, because the number of country news
papers is very large.
Mr. REED. I am interested in knowing whether the Senator
believes that less than $50,000 would be used in covering that
expense.
Mr. OWEN. I should not think that $50,000 would begin to
cover it.
The triumphant reign of monopoly and of special privilege
in this country is due, in my opinion, to a sinister combination
between machine politics and organized special privilege. The
initiative, the referendum, and the recall is the open door to
the overthrow of this dangerous alliance, and this is the reason
why South Dakota, Montana, Oregon, Oklahoma, Maine, Mis
souri, Arkansas, Nevada, and Utah have adopted it in their
constitutions, and explains why the legislatures of California,
Washington, North Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska, Wis
consin, and Florida have submitted it to the people for constitu
tional amendment, and why it is an active issue in nearly all of
the remaining States of the Union. It explains why Arizona
has put this principle in its constitution, and why the people of
Illinois voted for it by nearly four to one.
This is a world-wide movement, Mr. President It is the law
Of Switzerland, of Australia, and of New Zealand. It is an issue
In the Canadian States. It means the rule of the people against
5448— 10271
9
the rule of the machine, and it means nothing less than this.
And no sophistry and no ridicule and no evasion will ever
serve to stop this issue from sweeping the United States. The
government of cities by commission, with local initiative, refer
endum, and recall involves this, and is a part of this movement.
The Senator from Utah was the first Senator to arise and
denounce the initiative, the referendum, and the recall, and in
doing so he was obliged to denounce the constitution of his own
State—“ the permanent will o f the people ” in his own State,
according to the words used by the Senator from Utah himself.
Mr. President, men and their opinions are controlled by their
education and by their environment I am subject to this rule,
and the Senator from Utah is no exception to it. He obviously
gives expression to the views of the controlling powers of his
own State outside of the constitution o f Utah, and I deem it
my duty to call the attention of the Senate and of the country
to the fact that the only Senator so far who has denounced the
initiative, the referendum, and the recall has done so in the
face of the constitution of his own State.
I deem it my duty also, Mr. President, and I perform this duty
with painful reluctance because of a sincere personal regard for
the Senator from Utah, to call attention to the fact that the
ruling power of the State of Utah, whose views, I believe, speak
through the Senator from Utah, is openly charged with com
prising one of the most powerful political machines, religious
hierarchies, and commercial oligarchies ever established on
earth. I do not assume to have any personal knowledge of the
conditions of that State, but a predecessor to the Senate from
Utah, ex-United States Senator Frank J. Cannon, himself raised
a Mormon, has set forth in great detail a description of this
extraordinary religious and commercial monopoly.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President----The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Utah?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Utah.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President, the Senator from Utah [Mr.
S u t h e r l a n d ] , to whom the Senator from Oklahoma is refer
ring, is not now in the Chamber; he is out of the city. I f he
were here no doubt he would answer a great many o f the in
sinuations which the Senator has already cast upon him.
I wish to state that if the Senator thinks it proper for him
to pick up a magazine article written by a man who he him
self ought to know is utterly unworthy of being believed in any
way, shape, or form, for the purpose of casting a reflection
upon a Senator or a State I am surprised at his idea of justice
in such a case. Charges are easily made, but are not so easily
proven. I say now to the Senator from Oklahoma that the
statements which he has repeated here are absolutely uncalled
for, unfounded, and untrue.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, I think, if they are untrue, they
ought to be demonstrated to bP untrue. They have been given
the widest publicity throughout the United States. I have
seen no adequate answer. I suppose there may be one forth
coming, but I do think that if it is true that Senators are
named to this floor by the prophet of the Mormon Church, the
Senate of the United States ought to know it, and the country
ought to know it. If it is not true, the charge ought to be
5448— 10271
10
answered; it ought to be denied; it ought to be shown to he
absolutely false, because it affects the good name of the Senate
of the United States and of one o f the great States of the
Union for whose people I have great respect.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President-----The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
further yield?
Mr. OWEN. I yield.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President, I suppose this is not the proper
place or time for me to discuss this question, but I want to say
to the Senator from Oklahoma that I deny the statements, and
I say to him and to the country that they are not true. Because
there is no denial of published articles which are written by a
man for whom no one in his own State has any regard or
belief in his word, are they to be accepted as true? Aud is it
possible that the Senator thinks such statements should or
could always be followed by a denial? It seems to me that, if
that were the case, there are other people who would have to be
denying statements made against them almost all the time. I
will simply content myself by saying to the Senator that the
statements are not true.
Mr. OWEN. Does the Senator think that it ought to go
uninquired into?
Mr. SMOOT. Why, Mr. President, I have not expressed an
opinion in relation to an inquiry into the matter; but the Sen
ator was reading a statement, and seemingly approving of it
as the absolute truth. I am not here to defend the Mormon
Church; I was elected by the people of the State of Utah, irre
spective o f their religious belief, and I represent every man
and woman in that State; I do not care what his or her religion
may be; I am here as a citizen o f the United States; and I will
go just as far as the Senator from Oklahoma ever dared go in
maintaining every principle of liberty and a clean, an honest,
and a representative Government.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, I am pleased to have the assur
ance of the Senator from Utah, but I have deemed it my duty
to call the attention of the Senate to this matter, and I think
it deserves to be inquired into. Certainly, the provision for
the initiative, the referendum, and the recall has been in the
constitution of Utah for 10 years. Why has It not been vital
ized, and why does the Senator from Utah [Mr. Sutherland]
denounce the initiative, the referendum, and the recall? Do
both Senators from Utah agree to that position? I should like to
ask the senior Senator from Utah whether or not he approves the
initiative and the referendum or whether he denounces them also?
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President, I have taken no part in this
discussion, nor do I care to do so at this time. I suppose that
when the time comes for a vote the Senator will know where
I stand. I have been in the Senate long enough for the Sena
tor himself to know that whatever I believe I so vote.
Mr. OWEN. There has been set forth, Mr. President, a very
elaborate description of the commercial oligarchy that con
trols that State. I have no desire to wound the feelings of
the Senator from Utah [Mr. S u t h e r l a n d ] , but I think that
the Senator from Utah [Mr. S u t h e r l a n d ] might well hesitate
before he denounces the principles of the constitution of Okla
homa and sends his denunciation broadcast as plate matter.
5148— 10271
11
I am answering a Senator who denounces the initiative and
the referendum on the floor of the Senate which is written in
the constitution of his own State. I say that there must be some
kind of an explanation of that, and I can not perceive any
other explanation than that he voices the hostility of the ruling
powers outside of the constitution of Utah, because I believe
the initiative and referendum will break down any commercial
or political oligarchy whatever, anywhere, and that the con
trolling powers of Utah know it and for that reason oppose it.
Mr. Frank J. Cannon, assisted by Mr. Harvey J. O’Higgins,
with great solemnity and the most earnest assurance, declare to
the people of the United States the truth of the history they
have narrated in regard to the ruling powers of Utah in Every
body's Magazine. They declare that the Senators from Utah
are named by the Mormon “ prophet,” Joseph F. Smith, that
this church controls the political conditions of Utah, and that
they have broken faith with the people of the United States in
every promise they have made to conduct the affairs of that
State in the spirit of American institutions.
The predecessor of the Senator from Utah, ex-United States
Senator, Mr. Cannon, describes the manner in which commercial
passports to heaven are given by the Monnon hierarchy to its
loyal followers. He fully describes how the Mormons and
gentiles alike are exploited by a powerful oligarchy in con
trol of Utah. He describes how the children are hypnotized by
early and frequent vows to the church, and how their loyalty is
kept constant by everlasting reiteration of vows o f loyalty and
testimony of loyalty, given from month to month by the indi
viduals thus committed in childhood. For example, he describes
how a 14-year-old boy is required to rise and say before the con
gregation ak a creed:
Brethren and sisters, I feel called npon to say a few words. I am not
able to edify you, but I can say that I know this is the church and
Kingdom of God, and I bear my testimony that Joseph Smith was a
prophet and that Brigham Young was his lawful successor, and that the
Prophet Joseph F. Smith is heir to all the authority which the Lord has
conferred in these days for the salvation of men. And I feel that if I
live my religion and do nothing to offend the Holy Spirit, I will be
saved in the presence of my Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. W ith
these few words I will give way. Praying the Lord to bless each and
everyone of us is my prayer in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.
Ex-Senator Cannon describes how the individuals who thus
pledge their allegiance are kept in line by the examination and
espionage of monthly ward teachers, who enter the homes of the
people with authority and see that they are faithful and that
they renew or continue to allege their loyalty and fidelity. They
teach the simple elemental virtues of Christianity, abstinence
from alcohol, tobacco, tea, and coffee, and on this sound founda
tion o f decency and on the pledge of loyalty continually re
iterated they lay a foundation of fidelity that makes of the ordi
nary Mormon a subject of the prophet, a vassal, an obedient
follower of the orders—political or commercial— of the prophet.
There never was in the history of the world an oligarchy more
thoroughly and completely organized than in Utah, if this narra
tive be anywhere near the truth.
This description I present to the Senate for the reason that
it has gone into every quarter of the United States and, in
effect, it is a most serious attack upon the high standing and
good name of the Senate of the United States itself, and it
5448—10271
12
requires and demands a thorough-going investigation in order
either to establish its falsity or to demonstrate its truth, so that
the Senate of the United States and the people of Utah shall be
purged of this charge if it be false, or correct the unhappy con
ditions iu Utah if the statement should unfortunately prove to
be true.
Mr. Cannon describes in detail and vigor the inordinate
greed of Joseph F. Smith, the Mormon prophet, and makes the
following statement:
Along with this strain of commercial greed in Smith there is an
equally strong strain of religious fanaticism that justifies the greed
and sanctifies it to itself. He believes (as A postle Orson Pratt taught,
by authority of the church) that “ the kingdom of God is an order
of government established by divine authority. It is the only legal
government that can exist in any part of the universe. All other
governments are illegal and unauthorized.
* *
* Any people at
tempting to govern themselves by laws of their own making, and by
officers of their own appointment, are in direct rebellion against the
kingdom of God.”
Smith believes that over this kingdom the Smiths have been, by
divine revelation, ordained to rule. lie believes that his authority
is the absolute and unquestionable authority of God Himself. He be
lieves that in all the affairs of life he has the same right over his
subjects that the Creator has over His creatures. He believes that he
has been appointed to use the Mormon people as he in his inspired
wisdom sees fit to use them, in order the more firmly to establish
God's kingdom on earth against the powers of evil.
Messrs. Cannon and O'Higgins, in their last article, use the
following headlines:
Political headquarters of the State of Utah.
Headquarters of the
Mormon Church.
Utah-Idaho Sugar Co., Joseph F. Smith, president;
Inland Crystal Salt Co., Joseph F. Smith, president; Zion's Savings
Bank & Trust Co., Joseph F. Smith, president; State Bank of Utah,
Joseph F. Smith, president; Zion’s Cooperative Mercantile Institute,
Joseph F. Smith, president; Consolidated Wagon & Machine Co.,
Joseph F. Smith, president; Home Fire Insurance C a , Joseph F.
Smith, president; Beneficial Life Insurance Co., Joseph F. Smith,
president; Salt Lake Knitting Co., Joseph F . Smith, president; the
Deseret- News, Joseph F. Smith, president.
They conclude with chapter 20, as follows:
C
iia p t k r
20.
C O N C L U S IO N .
Of the men who could have written this narrative, some are dead,
some are prudent, some are superstitious, and some are personally for
sworn.
It appeared to me that the welfare of Utah and the common
good of the whole United States required the publication of the facts
that I have tried to demonstrate. Since there was apparently no one
else who felt the duty and also had the information or the wish to
write, it seemed my place to undertake it. And I have done it g lad ly;
for when I was subscribing the word of the Mormon chiefs for the ful
fillment of our statehood pledges, I engaged my own honor, too, and
gave bond myself against the very treacheries that I have here recorded.
We promised that the church had forever renounced the doctrine of
polygamy and the practice of plural-marriage living, by a “ revelation
from God ” promulgated by the supreme prophet of the church, and
accepted by the vote of the whole congregation assembled in conference.
W e promised the retirement of the Mormon prophets from the political
direction of their followers, the abrogation of the claim that the Mor
mon Church was the “ Kingdom of God ” reestablished upon earth to
supersede all civil government— the abandonment by the church of any
authority to exercise a temporal power in competition with the civil
law.
W e promised to make the teaching and practice of the church
conform to the institutions of a republic in which all citizens are
equal in liberty.
We promised that the church should cease to ac
cumulate property for the support of illegal practices and un-American
government.
And we made a record in proof of our promises by the antipolygamy
manifesto of 1890 and its public ratification; by the petition for am
nesty and the acceptance of amnesty upon conditions; by the provi
sions of Utah's enabling act and of Utah's State constitution; by the
acts of Congress and the judicial decisions restoring escheated church
544S— 10271
13
property; by the proceedings of the Federal courts of Utah In reopen
ing citizenship to the alien members of the Mormon Church ; by the
acquiescence of the Gentiles of Utah in the proceedings by which state
hood was obtained ; and, finally and most indisputably, by the admission
of Utah into equal sovereignty in the Union, since that admission would
never have been granted except upon the explicit understanding that
the State was to uphold the laws and institutions of the American
Republic in accordance with our covenants.
“ TH E
IN T E R E S T S ”
BA C K
TH E
CHURCH.
Of all these promises the church authorities have kept not one. The
doctrine and practice of polygamy have been restored by the church,
and plural-marriage living is practiced by the ruler of the kingdom and
his favorites with all the show and circumstance of an oriental court.
There are now being born in his domains thousands of unfortunate
children outside the pale of law and convention, for whom there can be
entertained no hope that any statute will ever give them a place within
the recognition of civilized society.
The prophet of the church rules with an absolute political power in
Utah, with almost as much authority in Idaho and Wyoming, and with
only a little less autocracy in parts of Colorado, Montana, Oregon,
Washington, California, Arizona, and New Mexico. He names the Rep
resentatives and S e n a to r in Congress from his own State and influ
ences decisively the selection of such “ deputies of the people ” from
many of the surrounding States. Through his ambassadors to the Gov
ernment of the United State, sitting in House and Senate, he chooses
the Federal officials for Utah and influences the appointment of those
for the neighboring States and Territories. He commands the making
and unmaking of State law. He holds the courts and the prosecuting
officers to a strict accountability. He levies tribute upon the people of
Utah and helps to loot the citizens of the whole Nation by his alliance
with the political and financial plunderbund at Washington.
He has
enslaved the subjects of his kingdom absolutely, and he looks to it as
the destiny of his church to destroy all the governments of the world
and to substitute for them the theocracy— the “ government by God ”
and administration by oracle— -of his successors in office.
.And yet, even so, I could not have recorded the incidents of this be
trayal as mere matters of current history— and I would never have writ
ten them in vindication of myself— if I had not been certain that there
is a remedy for the evil conditions in Utah, and that such a narrative
as this will help to hasten the remedy and right the wrong.
Except
for the aggressive aid given by the national administrations to the lead
ers of the Mormon Church, the people of Utah and the intermountain
States would never have permitted the revival of a priestly tyranny in
politics. Except for the protection of courts and the enforced silence of
politicians and journalists, polygamy could not have been restored in
the Mormon Church. Except for the interference of powerful influences
at Washington to coerce the Associated Press and affect the newspapers
of the country, the Mormon leaders would never have dared to defy the
sensibilities of our civilization. Except for the greed of the predatory
“ interests ” of the Nation, the commercial absolutism of the Mormon
hierarchy could never have been established. The present conditions in
the Mormon kingdom arc due to national influences. The remedy for
those conditions is the withdrawal of national sympathy and support.
WHO
IS TO RULE I N
UTAH?
Break the power at Washington of Joseph F. Smith, ruler of the
Kingdom of God, and every seeker after Federal patronage in Utah will
desert him. Break his power as a political partner of the Republican
Party now— and of the l>emocra*Hc Party should it succeed to office— and every ambitious politician in the W est will rebel against his throne.
Break his power to control the channels of public communication
through interested politicians and commercial agencies, and the senti
ment of the civilized world will join with the revolt of the “ American
movement ” in Utah to overthrow his tyrannies. Break his connection
with the illegal trusts and combines of the United Slates, and his finan
cial power w ill cease to be a terror and a menace to the industry and
commerce of the intormountain country.
The Nation owes Utah such a rectification, for the Nation has been,
In this matter, a chief sinner nnd a strong encourager of sin.
The Republic must overthrow the modern Mormon kingdom, or that
kingdom will sap the honor and power of the Republic. Both can not
survive ns temporal sovereignties under their present exclusive preten
sions. The Republic must vindicate its own jurisdiction, by State and
Nation, over the temporal affairs of men within its borders, or It must
rest content with such fragments of sovereignty as encroaching ecclesiasts care to leave it. The records of the world may be searched in
5448— 10271
vain for an instance in which a government deriving its powers from
the consent of the governed, and a government claiming to derive ex
clusive and world-wide authority from God on high, were able to occupy
in harmony the same territory. They have never done i t ; they can not
do it now.
H O W U T A H CAN BE FREED.
The Nation need not fear that in breaking the pretensions of the
modern Mormon kingdom it will be engaging in a religious persecution.
It is not religious persecution to deny the representative of a foreign
potentate a seat in our Senate. It is not religious persecution to insist
on the observance of a solemn covenant. It is not religious persecution
to demand that a hierarchy shall keep out of politics. In my story of the
modern Mormon kingdom I have denounced not doctrines, but decep
tion ; not the keeping of faith with God, but the breaking of faith with
m e n ; not the religion which cheers and sustains, but the hierarchy
which hides under the altars of that religion to prey and plunder. The
Nation can make the same distinction.
And the Nation owes such a rectification not only to Utah, but also
to itself. The commercial and financial plunderbund that is now preving upon the whole country is sustained at Washington by the help of
the agents of the Mormon Church. The prophet not only delivers his
own subjects up to p illage; he helps to deliver the people of the entire
United States.
His Senators arc not representatives of a political
p a r ty ; they are the tools of “ the interests ” that are his partners.
The shameful conditions in Utah are not peculiar to that S ta te ; they
are largely the result of national conditions, and they have a national
effect. The prophet of Utah is not a local despot only ; he is a national
enem y; and the Nation must deal with him.
I do not ask for a resumption of cruelty, for a return to proscrip
tion. I ask only that the Nation shall rouse itself to a sense of its re
sponsibility. The Mormon Church has shown its ability to conform to
the demands of the Republic— even by “ revelation from God,” if neces
sary. The leaders of the church are now defiant in their treasons only
because the Nation has ceased to reprove and the national administra
tions have powerfully encouraged. A s soon as the Mormon hierarchy
discovers that the people of this country, wearied of violated treaties
and broken covenants, are about to exclude the political agents of the
prophet from any participation in national affairs, the advisers of his
inspiration will quickly persuade him to make a concession to popular
wrath. As soon a s-“ the interests ” realize that the burden of shame in
Utah is too large to be comfortable on their backs, they will throw it off.
The Presidents of the United States will be unable to gain votes by
patronizing the crucifiers of women and children. The national admin
istrations will not dare to stand against the efforts of the Gentiles and
the independent Mormons of Utah to regain their liberty. And Utah,
the Islam of the W est, will depose its old sultan and rise free.
TH E
TR U TH
SH A LL
T R IU M P H .
W ith this hope— in this conviction— I have written in all candor
what no reasons of personal advantage or self-justification could have
induced me to write. I shall be accused of rancor, of religious antago
nism, of political ambition, of egotistical pride. But no man who knows
the truth will say sincerely that I have lied. Whatever is attributed as
my motive, mv veracity in these articles will not be successfully im
peached.
In that confidence I leave all the attacks that guilt and
bigotry can make upon me to the public to whom they will be addressed.
The truth, in its own time, will prevail, in spite of cunning. I am w ill
ing to await that time, for myself and for the Mormon people.
Mr. President, I know nothing about the truth of this matter.
It may be absolutely false from beginning to end; it may be
utterly unworthy to be uttered, but it is a very serious matter,
coming from an ex-Member of this body, ex-United States
Senator Frank J. Cannon. I do not know whether it is true or
false; I do not pretend to know; but I think that the Senate
ought to know the truth o f this grave accusation, and ought to
know it by a proper investigation and inquiry into it.
Mr. President, I very greatly regret that the principles of
the initiative, the referendum, and the recall, which are con
tained in the constitution of Utah, should be now openly de
rided and flouted by the Senator from Utah without sound
reason or argument. It is very extraordinary that a Senator,
5448— 10271
15
holding the honors and the dignities of a State, should ridicule
and denounce the principles laid down in the constitution of his
own State, but it is no more extraordinary than the fact that
five succeeding legislatures in that State should have refused
to vitalize the constitution of Utah by passing the necessary
statutes for its enforcement These five legislatures have been
urged to perform this duty by those who believe in the doctrine
of self-government and in the doctrine of t-he rule of the ma
jority. The mere fact that these legislatures have refused to
perform this obvious duty, and the fact that the Senator from
Utah denounces these doctrines of the constitution of Utah,
is a circumstance of vast importance in the light of the charge
that the Mormon Church as a political and commercial oli
garchy controls the political affairs of that State and dictates
the appointment of Senators from that State.
Mr. President, I would not willingly say anything that would
wound the feelings of the Senator from Utah, but when he uses
his position as a Senator to denounce the principles of good
government, in which I believe— which I believe of vital im
portance— when he denounces the initiative and the referen
dum, when he denounces the principles of government laid
down in the constitution of Oklahoma and ridicules the people
of Oklahoma, and when his argument goes out all over the
United States as a campaign document against the people’s
rule, it is my duty to the people of Oklahoma and to the cause
of popular government to enter a vigorous protest against the
argument submitted by the Senator from Utah and to make
such answer as will give that argument its proper place before
the electorate of the United States.
No one should be surprised that the Mormon Church should
oppose the initiative, the referendum, and the recall, and no one
should be surprised that the income-tax amendment should be
voted down by the Legislature of Utah. (March 9, 1911.)
It is but natural that the Senator from Utah should be power
fully influenced by the opinions of the controlling powers of
his State, without whose support I believe he could not appear
on the floor of this Chamber. It is but natural that he should
give voice to the opinions of those at the'head of this religious
hierarchy. It is but natural that, under the circumstances of
his environment, he should oppose the rule of the majority
and oppose those democratic agencies which would overthrow
the rule of the minority. It is but natural that he should
regard with disapproval the views of the Senator from Okla
homa; that he should ridicule .the Senator from Oklahoma and
the liberty-loving people of that State; that he should denounce
the idea of amending the Consitution of the United States as
undemocratic. It would be but natural, Mr. President, in view
of the conservative opinions of the Senator from Utah and who
appears to believe in the absolute perfection of the Constitution
of the United States, that the Senator from Utah should be pre
ferred as a candidate for the Supreme Court o f the United
States, as ex-United States Senator Cannon alleges.
Mr. President, I have no doubt of the industry, high character,
and good citizenship of the great-body of the people of Utah,
Mormons and gentiles, and nothing which I have said could be
construed as any unkind reference to the people o f that State.
My reference has been to a religious and commercial oligarchy
5448— 10271
16
described by Frank J. Cannon, which appears to be engaged in
the governing business in Utah, and which I regard as un-Amer
ican in the highest degree, and as most injurious to the people
of Utah, and especially to the Mormons. The Mormon Church
ought to go out o f the political business, as it agreed to do. If
it is true that the Mormon “ prophet ” names the Senators from
Utah on this floor, and uses the power of a religious hierarchy
to accomplish this, he is able to do a positive harm to the peo
ple of the United States outside o f Utah and to the people of
Oklahoma, which I have the honor, in part, to represent.
The mere fact that the Senator from Utah criticized the
Senator from Oklahoma and the State of Oklahoma would not
have induced me to call attention to this matter had I not felt
that the issue of popular government is one of vital importance
to the people of the United States.
I mjght pause to remark that I was not present in the Senate
when I was assailed by the Senator from Utah, but I do not
complain of it at all, because Senators are so frequently away
from the floor that a Senator would have to be silent and be
denied the right to criticise the views of a fellow Senator if he
could only do so when a Senator were present.
I have been surprised that the Senator from Utah should
have gone out of his way to assail Oklahoma and its constitu
tion, and I am willing to believe that it was done in a spirit of
levity and ridicule for the purpose of denouncing the doctrine
of popular government, for which Oklahoma is distinguished,
but I have not been willing to leave this volley of epithet,
sarcasm, and ridicule against the principles of the constitution
of Oklahoma which her liberty-loving people believe in to re
main unanswered.
In answering I have endeavored to do my duty to the people
of Utah and to the Republic and to the cause of the popu
lar government in which I deeply and profoundly belieye, and
to vindicate the great Constitution and to defend the wisdom
and the patriotism of my own beloved people of Oklahoma.
544S— 10271
o
REMARKS
OF
1ION. ROBERT L. OATEN
OF
R E P L Y IN G
TO
OKLAHOMA
THE
P R E S ID E N T ’ S V E T O
T H E A R IZ O N A A N D N E W M E X IC O
S T A T E H O O D B IL L
IN TH E
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
A U G U S T 18, 1911
W A S H IN G T O N
G826— 10297
1911
OF
REMARKS
. OF
I I ON. R O B E R T
L. O W E N .
_The Senate having under consideration the joint resolution (S. J. Res.
57 ) to enable the people of New Mexico to form a constitution and State
government and be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the
original States, and to enable the people of Arizona to form a constitu
tion and State government and be admitted into the Union upon an
equal footing with the original States—
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P r e s i d e n t : Stripped of all verbiage, the meaning of the
veto of the President because of the “ judicial recall ” in the
Arizona constitution is a declaration on the part of the Chief
Executive that he is unwilling to admit Arizona and New Mex
ico to enjoy the rights of self-government on an equal footing
with the other States of the Union as guaranteed by the Consti
tution, because Arizona proposes to exercise this right in a
manner the Chief Executive does not approve.
It is not pretended (hat the “ judicial recall” is in violation
of the Constitution of the United States, of the Declaration of
Independence, or of the enabling act.
The President thinks the judicial recall is not wise “ govern
mental policy,” and therefore he refuses to allow a sovereign
State to exercise its own right of self-government, because, in
the proposed exercise of this right, the people do not yield to
his views. lie thinks Arizona should be denied statehood be
cause, under its constitutional right of self-government, they
favor the judicial recall. His sole justification for denying
Arizona its right to statehood on an equal footing with the
other States of the Union is because, in the exercise o f such
right, they adopt the judicial recall by the vote of the people.
He does not approve this. He says that, in his opinion, it “ is
destructive of free government.” The fact is such a veto is
“ destructive of free government.” To deny the right of free
government to a sovereign State by veto as a condition of its
admission on an equal footing with the other States is a gra\e
wrong done to “ free government.”
It is an unwarrantable attack on the fundamental right or
self-government, which I deeply regret.
Arizona proposes the freest government in the United States,
giving the majority of the people of the State the right io
amend their constitution at w ill; to nominate, elect, and recall
their own officials. If they find the judicial recall inexpedient,
under the free government of Arizona they can amend it at any
time. Thirty-two States of the Union provide in their consti
tutions for the recall of judges by the address of the legislature.
Forty-three States provide the automatic recall by short tenure,
but the recall by popular vote, although conceded to be a
right which other' States have, which Oregon has long enjoyed,
0820—10297
'
3
4
and which California is about to adopt, is to be denied Arizona,
and her people are to be denied the right of self-government
because they have dared to adopt it.
With profound respect for our Chief Executive, I deem it
my duty to say that the veto is not justified, for the simple rea
son that the people of Arizona, under the right to be admitted
on an equal footing with the other States in the Union, have a
right to govern themselves in their own way without the inter
ference or coercion of the Chief Executive o f the United States.
The power of the Executive is so great, since a minority of
the Senate can sustain the veto, that he is able to coerce Ari
zona by his veto, to coerce Congress by his veto, into requiring
Arizona to strike out. the judicial recall or remain out of the
Union.
It is not denied that Arizona will have the right legally to
provide the judicial recall immediately after admission, nor is
it doubtful that Arizona will immediately adopt it when ad
mitted.
It seems to be the idea o f the President merely to emphasize
before the country his disapproval o f the judicial recall by
vote of the people, and I feel it my duty as an advocate of
popular government to place on the records of the country an
answer to the reasoning offered by the President in justifica
tion of the veto.
But, first, I think it proper to say that the presidential veto
is not justified, even if he were right in disapproving the
judicial recall. The President is in grave error to deny the
people of Arizona the free and full right of self-government
merely because in the exercise of their acknowledged right of
self-government they do not yield to his personal views. The
President is in grave error in coercing them, as a condition of
admission to statehood, to submit to his will, and he does a
wrong to all those who believe in the judicial recall by this
abuse o f the veto power, by using the powers o f the Presidency
and the prestige of that high office to put the seal of his con
demnation on this policy of government. lie does a wrong to
both California and Oregon in such an unjustified veto.
The first reason offered by the President is that the majority
of the people of Arizona can not be trusted to deal justly with
the State judges, if they are subject to recall. lie suggests that
the “ unbridled expression of the majority, converted hastily
into law or action, would sometimes make a government tyran
nical and cruel; ” that the majority should be subject to checks
to prevent the abuse of their power on the minority. The
President says:
Constitutions are checks upon the hasty actions of the majority.
They are the solf-impo ed restraints of the whole people upon a ma
jority of them to secure sober action and a respect for the rights of
the minority.
The President does not trust the majority o f the people
unless they are obstructed in the exercise of their will by va
rious checks and devices. This is the vital point of difference
between the progressives and those who oppose the progressive
movement. The progressives believe in the integrity, honesty,
and wisdom of the majority. They believe that the majority is
conservative. The majority well knows that it consists of
682G— 10297
5
Individuals, of groups of individuals, and of minorities, and
that the safety of the majority absolutely depends upon the pro
tection of the individual and of the minority. It is for this
very reason that the majority have always declared in favor
of free religion, free speech, and every liberty justified by the
rights of others. It is this clear conception of the majority
that has all these years given protection to the individual by
the voluntary and deliberate act of the majority. I deeply
regret that our honored Executive should take the view of
those who oppose the progressive movement, and should speak
of the “ unbridled expression of the majority,” “ the hasty ac
tion of the majority,” arid suggest that the majority might be
swept “ by momentary gusts of popular passjon,” “ by hasty
anger,” or be moved by “ firebrands and slanderers ” and by
“ stirrers-up of social hate.”
Mr. President, the sober common sense of the majority of the
people, exercising its right in the dignity, quiet, and seclusion of
the voting booth, is not moved by the mob spirit; it is not
turbulent, violent, moved by “ hasty anger” or “ gusts of popu
lar passion.” The views of the majority of the people, under
the safeguards of the American ballot box, is the most con
servative, thoughtful, and trustworthy power in the United
States, and will abundantly safeguard the right of the indi
vidual citizen to all of his rights to life, liberty, and the pur
suit of happiness. It is only on the majority the citizen can
rely. The danger of the citizen is to be found in the craft and
corruption of the few, of the minority, who have by indirection
and by checks on the majority usurped undue power in the
governing business.
The danger of this country lies In the governmental control
by minorities and by the agencies through which they operate,
including a judiciary nominated by privilege and kept in power
by craft.
Our honored Chief Executive suggests that “ often an intelligent
and respectable electorate may be so roused upon an issue that
it will visit with condemnation a decision o f a just judge.” I
emphatically deny it. An “ intelligent and respectable elec
torate ” will not visit with condemnation a decision of a just
judge nt any time, much less with frequency or “ often,” as our
honored Chief Executive imagines. The majority elects and
reelects and continues to reelect just judges in our numerous
States, and the more just the judge the more certain is his reelection. Not an instance can be given of a judge defeated by
the people because of his upright conduct.
The idea that the majority of the people will be moved by
“ hasty anger” against a faithful judge executing the law laid
down by the representatives of the majority has no just founda
tion in fact. The majority of the people will never be moved by
hasty anger to deal unjustly with a faithful public servant.
The majority moves only too slowly in dealing with unfaithful
public servants, and this is manifested by the experience of the
governments of many of the cities o f the Republic and of the
States where it frequently happens that organized criminal
minorities, engaged in the governing business for profit, are per
mitted for long periods of time to pursue their bad conduct
without lining called to vigorous account by the justifiable
anger of the majority.
C82G— -10297
6
The President thinks the judicial recall is “ destructive of
free government.” The people of Arizona, like Oregon and
California, familiar with gross judicial abuses and a control
o f the judiciary in California by the Southern Pacific Railroad,
believe the judicial recall an essential part of free government.
But whether the people of Arizona or the President be right,
there is no doubt whatever that the people of Arizona have the
right to determine this matter for themselves, and that the
Chief Executive has no right to coerce them in the matter of
their own self-government. The President has raised the issue
as to whether or not the people o f Arizona should have the
right of self-government or whether they should be denied this
right, and on this issue, I think, the President is in error to
deprive them o f the right to govern themselves merely because
they do not propose to govern themselves in accordance with
his opinion.
The second point which the President makes is that the
judges, under the judicial recall by a vote of a majority of
the people, would be so intimidated that they would become
“ timeservers and trimmers.” The President says:
The character of the judges would deteriorate to that of trimmers
and timeservers, and independent judicial action would be a thing of
the past.
.Mr. President, the character of our State judges, who are
elected by the people for short terms and who are subject to
automatic recall and who are subject to recall by the legisla
tures without impeachment and without assigning cause for
recall, shows that the President’s anticipations are not justified.
Our State judiciary is well deserving of the commendation
which even the President generously gives.
The people ordinarily select good men for judges, and the
judges in the very great majority of cases, under the system
of popular election and short tenure, have not become “ trim
mers and timeservers.” The recall of State judges is so rare I
do not remember a single case in recent years. Undoubtedly
they are subject to the influence of sound, matured public opin
ion, and it is only right that they should be. All men, whether
judges or not, are subject to the influences that surround them,
and it is this very fact, which the President so strongly em
phasizes—that the judges are subject to influence— that makes
it of the greatest importance that the influences which do en
viron the judge should be good influences and not bad influ
ences.
The very reason the people of Arizona demanded the judicial
recall by popular vote grew out of the experience in California,
where the judges were under the influence of the Southern
Facific Railroad. Privilege can exercise its influence in a great
variety o f ways. For example, it can skillfully bring about, by
machine methods, the nomination of a man and the election or
appointment of a judge whose previous predilection is alto
gether favorable to privilege, though not understood by the
people.
Privilege can, by the hypnotic influences of skilled social
and personal agencies, lead the mind of a man away from the
people and into the service o f privilege, and since judges are
equally subject to the crafty occult influences of privilege, as
well as to the influences of public opinion, we must choose
6826— 10297
7
which of the two influences shall prevail. Those who believe
in the progressive movement prefer the influence of the people
to the influence of privilege. I believe that the American,
people, when they have considered this question, will decide
that since the judges are more or less subject to influence, it
is better to have them subject to the conservative, honorable,
wise, and just influence of public opinion rather than
to have them subject to the crafty or corrupt influence of
privilege without any power in the people of a direct remedy.
Between the influence of privilege and the influence of the
people, I stand firmly for the influence of the people, and this
I regard to be the vital issue in dealing with the control of the
judiciary, whether in the State or in the Nation.
I t is this difference in the p o i n t o f v i e w b e t w e e n t h e p r o
g r e s s iv e s
S tates
AND
THEIR
OPPONENTS
THE
PEOPLE
OF
THE
UNITED
m u s t settle .
Mr. President, I ask to have printed as a Senate document
an abstract of the argument on. the recall of judges which I
delivered some days ago.
, ,
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, an order for the
printing thereof will be entered. [S. Doc. No. 90.]
68 26— 101297
X
ADDRESS
BY
SENATOR ROBERT L. OWEN
BEFORE THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF MUSKOGEE, OKLA., AND PUBLISHED IN THE
DAILY OKLAHOMAN OF SUNDAY, DECEMBER 31, 1911, RELATIVE TO THE
R E C A L L OF J U D G E S .
P ee sen ted
by
M e . C h a m b e r l a in , J a n u a e y 11, 1912.
Mr. O w e n said:
Gentlemen of the bar, as a member of this association I take great
interest in this body and its deliberations. I made the first draft and
secured the passage of the bill establishing the United States court
for Indian Territory in 1889, and was the secretary of the first bar
association, which was organized at that time at Muskogee, Ind. T.
As a representative of Oklahoma in the United States Senate, I intro
duced a bill (S. 3112) on July 31, 1911. providing for the election and
recall of Federal judges and discussed the matter on the floor of the
Senate, giving the reasons which, in my opinion, justified this reform.
The issue which was raised in this way has resulted in widespread
discussion on the question of recall, particularly in bar associations
throughout the Union, and naturally the bar, feeling a sense of
loyalty and affectionate regard for the bench, seems inclined to ques
tion the wisdom of the judicial recall. But it also is true that many
judges of the highest distinction regard the judicial recall as essential
to the safety of the people and to the honor of the bench.
RECALL N O W OPERATIVE.
Since the members of the bar are taught to reverence precedents
and to believe that precedents, being founded on wisdom and ex
perience, should not be ignored nor disregarded: I call your atten
tion to the fact that the matured judgment of the American people
has found it wise to establish control over the State judiciary in at
least six different ways: First, by impeachment; second, by legisla
tive recall; third, bv executive recall; fourth, by automatic recall by
fixed tenure; fifth, by popular recall; and sixth, by requiring judges
to submit themselves to popular vote for nomination and election.
Three States have four ways of recalling judges, to wit: Popular
recall, legislative recall, automatic recall by short tenure, and recall
by impeachment.
Thirty-five States have three ways of recalling judges, to wit:
Impeachment, automatic recall, and legislative recall.
Forty-eight States have two ways of recall, to wit: Impeachment
and either automatic recall or legislative recall.
Every single State has at least two methods of recall, either legisla
tive or automatic and recall by impeachment. I submit a table of
the various States, indicating the recall by impeachment by one star
(*), impeachment and automatic recall or legislative recall by two
stars (**), impeachment, automatic recall, and legislative recall by
three stars (***), and States with four forms of recall—impeachment,
automatic, legislative, and popular recall—by four stars (****),
Arizona being included in the latter for good reasons, well understood.
31564°—12
J
2
ADDRESS BY SENATOR O W E N .
Recall of judges.
r<
How elected.
States.
Elected bv general assembly......................
Elected by voters............................................
........d o ......................................................
........d o ....................................................
....... d o ..................................................
Louisiana..................................................... ........d o ................................................................
M a in e ...........................................................
Maryland.....................................................
Massachusetts............................................
Michigan.....................................................
Missouri.......................................................
O h io............................................................. : : : : : d o : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
....... d o .............................................: ..................
Rhode' Island............................................
Elected bv general assembly subject to
resolution general assembly.
South Carolina..........................................
South Dakota............................................
Tennessee................................................... ........d o .................................................................
T exas...........................................................
U tah .............................................................
Virginia.......................................................
Washington................................................
Wisconsin...................................................
W yom ing................................................... —
d o ................................................................
Forms of
recall.
***
**
****
****
**
***
***
***
***
**
***
***
**
***
***
***
***
***
**
***
**
***
***
**
**
***
*+
**
***
***
***
**
***
**
****
***
**
***
**
***
***
***
**
***
***
***
***
**
Term.
Years.
5
8
6
12
9
8
12
G
G
G
9
m
12
7
15
8
6
9
10
m
21
.................
8
G
8
G
6
2
12
6
12
10
8
i During good behavior.
New Hampshire lias been recalled four times.
The Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma provided for impeachment,
executive and legislative recall, and elected judges by popular vote.
For details see Thorpe’s Constitutions and remarks on this ques
tion by me Monday, July 31, 1911, in United States Senate.
It will thus be seen that all of the States have at least two methods
of controlling judges besides requiring the judges to be elected in
nearly all the States. Most of the States have three methods of recall
besides requiring the judges to be elected.
RECALL A SAFEGUARD.
The reason underlying this universal constitutional control of the
judiciary is to safeguard the life, liberty, and property of the people
against the frailties of human nature, demonstrated bv history and
experience in an uncontrolled judiciary.
Great Britain in the act of settlement of 1701 provided for the recall
of British judges by act of Parliament, and has exercised this right
ADDRESS B Y SE NAT OR O W E N .
3
ever since, with the most satisfactory results, for 210 years. The
moving cause in Great Britain for establishing the legislative recall
was the brutal tyranny and unspeakable depravity of a lawyer named
George Jeffreys, who had been appointed lord chief justice of England
by James II. Jeffre3 for his unspeakable crimes, was sent to the
'S,
Tower of London, where he died; James II was run out of England,
and the bench of Great Britain has not been dishonored since by
such conduct as that of Jeffreys. I appreciate the suggestion of our
friend Hon. C. B. Stuart, in his ingenious address, that “ the lawyer
who will not defend judges when they are unjustly assailed, and who
will not shiver a lance for the upright and brave judiciary, is not
worthy to sit in the sacred halls of justice.” With this excellent sug
gestion no man should take issue, especially when an upright and
brave judiciary is not assailed. I do not recall at this time any recent
assault on judges that has required any defense or of any defense that
has been made of judges unjustly assailed. There seems, however,
to have been an impression with some of mv friends of the bar that
my proposal of legislative recall of the Federal judiciary contem
plated the popular recall of the Oklahoma State judiciary. I was not
aware, however, that there was any “ clamor ” in Oklahoma for the
popular recall of the State judiciary. I heard of this clamor for the
first and only time at this meeting.
Certainly, I have not advocated or even considered the question of
popular recall of judges in Oklahoma. Oklahoma has now the right
of recall by impeachment. Oklahoma also has the automatic recall
of judges by short tenure of office, which serves automatically to
remove any judge who may be inefficient or whose integrity might be
doubted by the people. Oklahoma has now a safeguard of having on
the bench judges nominated at the primaries by the people as accept
able to the people and subsequently elected by the people as satisfac
tory to them. The judges had the confidence of the people before they
were nominated, they had the confidence of the people before they
were elected, and I trust they will always deserve the confidence, the
honor, and the distinction they now enjoy. I wish to say, moreover,
that I have felt a special and peculiar pride in the Supreme Court of
Oklahoma, which already has won a very high place in the judiciary
of the States of the Union for the learning and the legal discrimina
tion and for the splendid decisions of that court.
REASONS FOR RECALL.
The reasons justifying the legislative recall of the Federal judiciary:
The legislative recall by resolution of Congress of the Federal judi
ciary is necessary and is based on the same identical reasoning upon
which 35 of the States have adopted this procedure for State judi
ciaries. That is, that impeachment is too severe a remedy in certain
cases and is impracticable for offenses requiring removal but not
deserving impeachment. Impeachment should only be invoked for
actual personal corruption or serious criminal conduct; but the legis
lative recall may be necessary and properly invoked even in cases
where there is no personal delinquency whatever. It may be invoked
for senility, for insanity, for imbecility, for paresis; or, again, it may
be invoked upon willful neglect of duty, for inefficiency, for gross in
competency, for intemperance, or for any persistent, tyrannical,
malicious, or detestable conduct. Any or all of the>e things may
4
ADDRESS B Y SENATOR O W E N .
arise in the life of an individual, due to physical, mental, or moral
decadence.
Judges are only human beings after all, and a careful student of
statecraft, guided by the desire to serve the general welfare of the
people and of all the people naturally takes a different point of view
from the lawyer who has been on the bench or expects to be on the
bench and who can not bear tire thought of recalling a judge for any
of these causes. Yet, thoughtful men must concede that even a judge
on the bench may go through physical, mental, or moral decay. He
may become, in fact, a neurotic, a paranoiac, an epileptic. He may
become an imbecile, or be afflicted with softening of the brain, or with
general paresis. May Heaven defend our beloved judiciary from any
of these human afflictions; yet. if they should come, in whole or in
part, to any of our honored Federal judges, I intend to do what I can
as a public servant to defend the interests of the people against such
an unfit judge. I am not willing to impeach an honored Federal
judge who may be the victim of these unavoidable human afflictions,
but as a legislator it seems to be my duty to advocate a remedy which
is benign and easily invoked to protect Oklahoma and the United
States against Federal judicial incompetency. These reasons are
entirely sufficient to justify legislative recall, but there are other
reasons why the Federal judiciary should be subject to such recall
which are much more important.
DELEGATED PO W ER .
The Federal judges are not elected by the people. They are not
nominated by the people because of the confidence of the people in
them, as are Slate judges. They are not elected by the people be
cause of the confidence of the people in them, as are our State judges.
They are nominated by a President of the United States, who him
self is not nominated by the people, but is nominated by delegates of
the third and fourth degree of delegated power in national conven
tion, who come with delegated power from State conventions: the
State conventions being composed of delegates delegated from county
conventions; the county conventions being composed of delegates
delegated from ward, township, or precinct caucuses or the most
part not safeguarded by law. The ward caucus as a rule in the
United States is controlled by a ward boss, who seizes the powers
of the unorganized, unprotected people of the ward and delegates it
to a ward henchman. The precinct delegates sent to the county con
vention send machine delegates of the second degree to the State con
vention, which often send machine delegates of the third or fourth
degree to the national convention, where these delegated delegates
of delegated delegates, resting on this uncertain foundation, nominate
as President a citizen who is four degrees removed from the people,
and when this President nominates a Federal judge for life this
Federal judge is five degrees removed from the people and subject
to no review or control by the people. The consequence is we have
established a Federal judicial oligarchy in this Nation, as Thomas
Jefferson forecast and prophesied in his letter to Jarvis in 1820. No
wonder the Federal judges, thus uncontrolled, undertook by judicial
decision to magnify their offices. No wonder Thomas Jefferson called
John Marshall “ a thief of jurisdiction.” John Marshall in Marbury
v. Madison insisted that to allow Congress to determine the con
ADDRESS B Y SENATOR O W E N .
5
stitutionality of its own acts “ would be giving to the legislature a
practical and real omnipotence." John Marshall, therefore, assumed
the “ real omnipotence” himself by stealing the jurisdiction to de
clare acts of Congress unconstitutional, a jurisdiction which was
four times refused to be granted to the Supreme Court by the Con
stitutional Convention of 1787, to wit, on June 5, June 6, July 21,
and August 15, 1787.
Thomas Jefferson was right in denouncing this conduct. President
Jackson was right in refusing to allow this court to determine the
national policy for his administration in the United States bank case,
and the American people supported him because he was right and
because the American people knew more than the lawyers who hap
pened by ingenious solicitation to have been appointed on this bench.
In recent years the most important national policies of the Nation
have been nullified or obstructed by the decisions of the Federal
courts, numerous State laws attempting to regulate corporations have
been nullified.
I N C O M E -T A X
LAW .
The income-tax law, demanded by 90.000.000 people, was nullified,
crippling the power of taxation of the National Government and dis
criminating against the greater part of the people in favor of those
best able to pay and justly owing this tax for the protection they
receive.
This decision has cost the producing masses nearly $1,600,000,000
in the last 16 years, made the rich richer and the poor poorer.
The antitrust act has been emasculated in the Standard Oil case
and in the Tobacco Trust case. Standard Oil stock went up immediatelv after this decision, which was trumpeted in the press as a deci
sion against Standard Oil.
The interstate commerce act has been greatly weakened, as I
abundantly set forth (Fee., -3701), July 31, 1911.
The compulsory arbitration act, passed as the result of the great
strike in Chicago in 1894, and intended to prevent the recurrence of
such unfortunate difficulties, was destroyed by the Supreme Court.
(Adair v. United States, 204 U. S. Rep.. 164.)
The employers’ liability act was held unconstitutional.
Over 200 Federal and State statutes have been held invalid by the
United States Supreme Court alone, and there are innumerable cases
where the lower Federal courts have nullified State statutes under
the shield of the Supreme Court decision. For example, the Okla
homa constitution, establishing a corporation commission, was de
clared invalid (Hook); the statute of Kansas taxing the Western
Union Telegraph Co. (216 U. S., 1); the statute of Texas taxing the
<rross receipts of railroad companies (210 U. S., 217) ; the Minnesota
statute regulating the rates of public service corporations (Shepherd
v. N. P. R. Co.), etc.
,
i ,
The fourteenth amendment, intended to protect the negro, has been
twisted from its purpose to protect the trusts and monopolies in
imposing long hours of labor on employees on the absurd theory that
to deny the employee the right to work long hours is a denial of his
constitutional “ privileges.” The obvious point of view of the court
is that a laboring man has such a constitutional right to work himself
to death; that public policy may not question it.
6
ADDRESS B Y SENATOR O W E N .
FAVORS T H E IN T E R E STS .
A whole series of cases could be pointed out showing that the point
of view of the Federal court is favorable to property interests and
unfavorable to manhood interests. After all, everything depends
on the point of view. If the Supreme Court should consist of nine
resolute Irishmen they would decide in favor of home rule for Ireland
and give the most learned reasons justifying this opinion. If the
court consisted of nine Tories they would give equally as learned
reasons against home rule and demonstrate it was a violation of the
fundamental law of Great Britain.
If the Federal judiciary is appointed for life and has the final word
on State laws, on Federal laws, on national policies, and can not be
recalled nor reviewed, then the art of government is reduced to this:
The art of nominating these judges. It is an open secret as to who
has developed this art in the highest perfection.
The plain truth is that the great powers in the organized financial
and commercial world skillfully contrive to nominate these Federal
judges and to nominate the President (who nominates the judges) by
the use of funds on a gigantic scale, secretly employed; by coercion
of employees, and by the far more sinister and dangerous method of
coercing the world of finance and commerce by the constriction of
credits which may at any time be carried to the point of a national
financial panic.
The Federal judiciary has, in my opinion, become the bulwark of
privilege and ought to be made immediately subject to legislative
recall by the representatives of the people for the safety of the people
and for the stability of the property of the masses—of the producers
of the Nation.
JU D IC IA L
IN F A L L IB IL IT Y .
The organs of privilege continually extol the judicial infallibility
of the Supreme Court and teach the people not to question it. The
truth is, however, that every time four out of five Supreme Court
judges are in the minority, their judicial fallibility is judicially ascer
tained bv the United States Supreme Court. Each of the justices in
turn has his judicial fallibility judicially ascertained in case after case
until they are innumerable. And the singular condition exists that
the change in opinion over night of the vote of one judge, as in the
case of Justice Shiras in the income-tax case, may transfer the ascer
tainment of the judicial fallibility of the four justices who first dis
agreed with Judge Shiras to the four justices who first agreed with
Judge Shiras. In this wav his vacillating vote demonstrated by the
vote of the Supreme Court justices the judicial fallibility of those who
disagreed with him in the first vote and of the remaining four justices
who disagreed with him in the second v
ote*.
Thus the changing vacillating vote of one justice put all eight of
his associates in the minority in the two votes and thus proved by a
majority vote of the Supreme Court the fallibility of every member
except Shiras, whose first and second opinions were both confirmed
by a majority of the court. The claim of judicial infallibility is
ridiculous.
Public opinion demands control of the Federal judges The
Democratic platform, 1908. protests against government by the
injunctions of the Federal judges.
ADDRESS B Y SENATOR O W E N .
7
The Republican platform, 1908, declares against certain injunctions
by the Federal courts.
The Independent Party, 1908, condemns the arbitrary use of
injunctions and contempt proceedings as a violation of the funda
mental American right of trial by jury.
The People’s Party of 1908 emphatically condemns the unjust
assumption of authority by inferior Federal court in nullifying State
law, etc.
The Socialist Party in its platform of 1908 declared “ Our courts
are in the hands of the ruling classes.”
But what difference does it make if the Republicans, the Democrats,
and all other parties protest if these judges are appointed for life and
can not be recalled?
The most learned lawyers and judges in the country have pointed
out this dangerous and mischievous condition, such as Walter L.
Clark, chief justice of North Carolina (Arena, November, 1907.)
Judge Clark said:
At the present time the supreme power is not in the hands of the people, but
in the power o f the judges, who can set aside at will any expression of the
people’s will, made through an act o f Congress or a State' legislature. These
judges are not chosen by the people, nor subject to review by them. This is
arbitrary power, and the corporations have taken possession o f it by simply
naming a majority of the judges.
Gilbert E. Roe (in La Follette’s, June-August, 1911) demonstrates
that these courts put the poor man at a disadvantage to the rich man
under the law, under “ the assumption of risk” by the poor employee
and the rule of “ negligence of a fellow servant,” etc.
Even President Taft, in his speech of September 16, 1909, said:
We must make it so that the poor man will have as nearly as possible an
equal opportunity in litigating as the rich man, and under the present condi
tions, ashamed as we may be of it, this is not the fact.
It was the fatal decision of the Supreme Court of the United States
in the Dred Scott case, nationalizing slavery, which caused the Civil
War. Lincoln declared this decision was based on falsehood; that it
was unsound. There was no way to review it, no way to recall the
court, no way to amend the reactionary Federal Constitution, and the
most terrible war of the whole world followed because the people had
no remedy available.
LEGISLATIVE RECALL.
I believe that the people of Arizona, of Oregon, and of California
have a constitutional right to adopt popular recall in addition to
legislative and automatic recall if they see fit. They are a free peo
ple, possessing full sovereignty, and have a right to choose their own
public servants and impose the conditions of the public service.
It is an open secret that in California the Southern Pacific packed
the California courts and that this was the reason why the people
demanded popular recall and voted for it by over 3 to 1.
While I have not advocated popular recall for executive, legislative,
or judicial offices where the people already have abundant means of
protection by electing judges for a fixed tenure of office or by legisla
tive recall, it is nevertheless my opinion that the people are more
reliable than the legislature. It is more difficult to move the people
8
ADDRESS B Y SENATOR O W E N .
to any hasty or inconsiderate action. It is not difficult to move the
legislature by caucus action, by logrolling, by lobbying, or by mis
representation and by combining selfish interests, because the legisla
tors are few in number, easily gotten together, and easily subjected
to unfair influences. It is much more difficult to move the people
than it is the legislature. The legislature may be stirred to some
sudden, impetuous action by an eloquent speech, brilliant but spe
cious. It may at times be tumultuous and have a riot, as at the
recent close of the Pennsylvania Legislature. But when the people
of a State, involving two or three hundred thousand people, go into
the quiet and seclusion of the voting booth, face to face with their
own several consciences, and for the general welfare cast their ballots
they are free from passion, excitement, or undue influence. The
people under these safeguards are more reliable than their representa
tives in caucus, convention, or legislature.
I very well understand that those who oppose putting power in the
hands of the people do so on the theory that the people are very
“ excitable,” “ tumultuous,” “ turbulent,” “ unrestrained,” “ impul
sive,” and a variety of other pleasing adjectives intended to portray
the people as an irresponsible mob.
This has been the Tory argument from the beginning of time. It
has no merit. It has no substantial truth.
L IB E L O N T1IE PEOPLE.
The suggestion, for example, that the people would drag a judge
from the bench by popular recall because of his upright conduct m
extending the constitutional guaranties to some unpopular person is
contrary to common sense and is a libel on the long-suffering common
people.
The theory that the Constitution was framed by the people to pre
vent the brutality and tyranny of the majority over the minority is
another fiction. The fact is, the skillful advocates of the minority
have usually contrived by craft and underhanded means to paralyze
the will of the majority by jokers put into various constitutions,
especially the Federal Constitution, as I set forth in some detail in
my reply to the Senator from Utah during the last session of Con
gress. The most conservative, sane force in this country is the rule
of the honest majority. The rule of the majority leads to peace, to
justice, to righteousness. The rule of the minority has nearly always
been in the interest of the few against the interest of the many, and
where it went too far the rule of the few has led to instability of
government, of property, and to revolution.
It is but natural that those who are the advocates of privilege
should adopt the Hamilton argument in favor of the rule of the few
and point out the “ dangers,” the “ brutality,” and the “ tyranny” of
the rule of the majority.
I believe in the rule of the people, in giving them direct power,
knowing that the American people are “ safe and sane,” that they are
a religious, industrious, intelligent, and benevolent people, who will
never deal unjustly with a judge or with any other public servant
who is faithful to their interests and who merits their approval.
O
Proposed Children's Bureau.
“ I believe we have a right to study child life and give publicity to a
knowledge of how to protect child life. It is a great national asset.”
SPEECH
OF
HON.
ROBERT
O F
In
th e
S
L. O W E N ,
O Iv L A II O M A ,
enate
of
th e
U
n it e d
S
tates,
Wednesday, January 31, 1012.
The Senate having under consideration the bill IS. 2H21 to establish
In the Department of Commerce and Labor a bureau to be known as the
children’s bureau—
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P r e s id e n t : This bill, almost word for word, passed
1lie Senate during the preceding Congress on the 34th of Feb
ruary, 1931, and without objection. The objections which
are now urged so strongly against the constitutionality of the
bill appear not to have been considered at all by the Senate
at that time. Even the senior Senator from Idaho [Mr. H e y b u b n ] gave his acquiescence to this bill on the 14th o f February,
a year ifgo.
I have no doubt of the constitutionality of this bill. I believe
that the Federal Government has a perfect right to provide for
its own self-preservation as a necessary implied power of the
Constitution. I believe whatever information is necessary to
be acquired by the Congress or the Senate, or by the Executive
Department, in the performance of their respective duties, is
fully justified. I believe that any information which is neces
sary to the “ general w elfare” or the common defense of this
Nation is fully justified under section S of Article I. The time
for debating the meaning o f that section has passed. The lan
guage is as plain as the English language can be made. It says
that the “ Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes,”
“ to provide” for the “ general w elfare” as well as the “ com
mon defense.” And the Congress has been providing for the
“ general w elfare” all these years. So far has it gone with re
gard to such matters affecting the general welfare that we have
enlarged our Federal services so that in the Bureau of Animal
Industry we expended last year $3,654,750 to promote the ani
mal industry and conserve and develop animal life. We have
taken great pains to eradicate Texas fever in cattle. We have
many men in the field now engaged in this work, clearing up
one county after another in various States, pushing back the
quarantine line against Texas fever of cattle from one point to
another. It is now crossing southward my State of Oklahoma. In
side of State lines Federal officials under the Agriculture Depart
ment are now engaged in stamping out various diseases of cattle
which would otherwise interfere with the food supply o f the Amer
ican people, and therefore be injurious to “ the general welfare.”
Congress has proceeded upon this theory ever since I was
born. Even gentlemen who have declared this bill was unconsti
tutional, within an hour voted for a substitute for this bill
by the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. O v e r m a n ] , which
contained every element of unconstitutionality of this bill, if it
be unconstitutional. What do these gentlemen mean by voting
for an unconstitutional provision on their several oaths, if in
reality they seriously think that such measure is unconstitu
tional ? The amendment proposed by the Senator from North Caro2 8 2 8 9 — 105S9
2
lina [Mr. O v e r m a n ] is just as open to the constitutional objection
as the bill brought in by the Senator from Idaho [Mr. B o r a h ] .
Not only has this power in the Federal Government been ap
proved by Senate after Senate, and by Congress after Congress,
and by President after President, but it has met the universal
approval of the people of the United States. It is the acknowl
edged Constitution and the accepted law. We need not debate the
Constitution any more. The time has gone to consider the question
of the constitutionality of this power in the Federal Government.
We expended in the Plant Industry Bureau last year $2,GS0.41G—for the protection of plant life— in the interest of
commerce, and now we can not spend $30,000 for the protection
of child life in the interest o f humanity. Great is commerce 1 It
ranks human life. I think it is of great importance to spend what
is necessary to protect this country against the insects which in
fect our forests, against the San Jose scale which affects the
orange groves o f the country, and other injurious insects, but
shall we spend that money freely as “ constitutional ” and at the
same time be unwilling to expend a dollar for the conservation
of the child life o f this Republic as “ unconstitutional” ?
Four hundred thousand children die every year in this coun
try under the age of 12 months, and one:half of them, a vast
army of 200,000 little children, lift up their tender voices to
this Republic asking for protection from preventable diseases;
and we spend $2,074,000 to protect our forests from insects and
refuse to spend $29,000 for the conservation of the child life
of this Republic.
Child labor is useful in coining money in sweatshop and in
mines and in dangerous and unhealthy service, and greedy em
ployers must not be interfered with, even by public opinion based
on well-ascertained facts collated by a child’s bureau. Great is
commerce! It has more power than humane considerations.
When we have had this country assailed by bubonic plague,
has any man questioned the right of Congress to protect human
life by appropriations and services employed for that end? Did
we not spend a million on the Pacific coast for stamping out
the bubonic plague for the protection of human life, for the
“ general w elfare” ? But we may not spend a pitiful $30,000
to establish a bureau of inquiry as to the best methods to pro
tect child life.
During the last season I sent 23.000 bulletins on how to take
care of hogs into Oklahoma; not a bulletin on how to take care
of children. We see such a man as Straus, in New York, spend
ing his own private funds for the purpose of furnishing pas
teurized milk and teaching the people of New York how they
can conserve child life. In that one simple instance thousands
of lives of little children were saved, and yet hundreds of
thousands of mothers know nothing about pasteurized milk or
how to take care o f an infant, and may not have the bulletins
of a child’s bureau when they anxiously seek advice having au
thority because it is “ unconstitutional ” to have a child’s bureau.
This “ unconstitutional ” bureau for protecting child life by
gathering and distributing knowledge might interfere with
sweatshops and factories where the labor o f children is coined
into money, and such interests will oppose this bill and urge
on representatives the objection of unconstitutionality while
concealing the real reason.
In the Bureau of Chemistry we spend $965,780, and in the
Bureau of ■Entomology we spend $001,920, a bureau particu28289— 10589
3
larly devoted to the study of insects and bugs, and uot a dollar,
is expended for tbe proper study of child life.
I agree that it is of importance to study the habits of the
boll weevil, and it is for the “ general welfare ” to protect this
country against the ravages of that insect so deadly to our
great cotton crop. This study has very great commercial im
portance, because it will enable us perhaps to destroy the life of
this pest. But I believe also that we have a right to study
child life and give publicity, and the widest publicity, to a
knowledge of how to protect child life. It is a great national
asset. It has great commercial importance, if I must put it
upon that low plane. Every human being has a certain com
mercial value, and is worth so many hundreds or so many
thousands of dollars. He has a certain productive value if a
slave and a greater value if a freeman. Let us take steps to
preserve the lives of human beings as a commercial asset and
as a matter of prudent national business. The acquisition of
knowledge on this subject and its wide distribution is the
cheapest way to accomplish this end.
I f this Nation is to be controlled by commerce alone, if it is
to disregard human life and consider nothing but commerce
and the vulgar sordid dollar, let us consider the commercial
value of .200,000 children annually whose lives we might save.
Are they worth $500 apiece? Then they have a commercial
value of $100,000,000 and this bill is justified as a means to
saving the vast sum invested in infants under 1 year of age.
I waive all sentiments of humanity, the grief and anguish of
unlearned mothers and fathers unnecessarily bereaved of their
little children.
Mr. President, as a matter of policy, this question has been
considered not only by learned men in this Republic but by
the learned legislators of the great nations o f the world abroad.
The German Empire has a complete method for considering and
investigating the conditions of child life with a view to pre
serving child life, and that wonderful nation, because of its
interest in the preservation of human life, is growing by giant
strides to be the master nation of Europe. Its great sons have
been a most tremendous asset to this Republic. They do not
believe in race suicide. They raise large families and love
children and care for them.
The German Empire has set us an example, and the British
Efnpire has set us an example in their recent “ child's a c t”
providing for the study of the conditions of child life. Why shall
we hang behind the march of the civilized world and lose sight of
the welfare of the little children of the greatest people on earth?
i f it is competent authority we want, we have had those
who are expert in this question give the most careful considera
tion to this question. This bill has been recommended by the
National Child Labor Committee, the National Federation of
Women’s Clubs, the Conference on Dependent Children, consist
ing of 200 men and women, the most learned in the world
with regard to this particular subject.
Among these distinguished Americans I call your attention to
a few, for instance:
Ilis eminence Cardinal Gibbons; Mr. John M. Glenn, director
of the Russell Sage foundation, New York City; Dr. S. M.
Lindsay, director of the New York School of Philanthropy;
Miss Jane Addams, Hull House. Chicago; Miss Lillian D.
Wald, of the Henry Street Settlement, New York; Mrs. Flor28289— 10589
4
ence Kelley, secretary o f the National Consumers’ League;
Mr. Thomas Nelson Page, author and publicist; Mr. Owen
B. Lovejoy, secretary of the National Child Labor Committee,
and Mr. A. J. McKelway, southern secretary o f the National
Child Labor Committee; Mr. J. Prentice Murphy, of the
Children’s Bureau of Philadelphia; Mr. Homer Folks, secre
tary of the State Charities Aid Association, New York; Hon.
Julian W. Mack, of the Court of Commerce; Mr. Hugh F. Fox,
president of the Children’s Protective Alliance, New Jersey;
Dr. Ludwig B. Bernstein, superintendent of the Hebrew Orphan
Asylum, New York City; Judge Ben B. Lindsey, judge of the
juvenile court o f Denver; Judge N. B. Feagin, of the juvenile
court of Birmingham, Ala.; Mrs. Lucy Syckles, superintendent
Michigan State Home for Girls; Mr. J. W. Magruder, secretary
of the Baltimore Charities Association; Mr. Hastings H. Hart
and L. F. Hamner, of the Russell Sage Foundation; Mr. Miles
M. Dawson, of the American Association of Labor Legislation;
Mr. H. Wirt Steele, executive secretary of the American Asso
ciation for the Prevention and Relief of Tuberculosis; Miss
Mary Wood, representing the Daughters of the American Revo
lution; Mr. Bernard Flexner, authority on juvenile court legis
lation, Louisville, Ivy.
Mr. President, the argument has been made that this will
cause a duplication of work. That has been most abundantly
answered. It was answered a year ago by the head of the
Census, Director North. He stated that there will be no dupli
cation in his department; that they were not concerned in
the questions which would be investigated by such a bureau
as this. Commissioner Neill, of the Bureau of Labor, of the
Department of Commerce and Labor, most emphatically said
that he thought this bureau ought to be established; and Com
missioner Brown, of the Bureau of Education of the Interior
Department, the very department where we were proposing by
an amendment to send this proposed bureau, also gave his testi
mony that the child’s bureau should be established, and that
it will not duplicate his work. These departments, which are
said to be concerned in this matter, have already testified in
favor of this measure, and the report will be found in the
R e c o r d of February 34, 3911.
So the objections have all been answered. The constitu
tionality is beyond doubt. The importance of the policy I can
not think will be disputed by any humane man. No far-seeing
statesman should deny that the preservation of human life
and the conservation of the little children o f this Nation is
one o f the most important subjects which can engage the con
sideration of the Senate.
Let us establish this bureau, and send out bulletins giving
reliable information to anxious mothers and fathers, to State
authorities, and to all who seek it, so that the knowledge of
child preservation shall become the common property of the
people of the Republic.
Let us gather the facts and show when and where children
are unfairly exposed so that public opinion may protect them.
Let us have publicity so that we may protect the innocent
and precious young life o f the Nation.
Let our people have the facts and they will verify the words
of the Book of Books, “ Ye shall know the truth, and the truth
shall make you free.”
28289— 10589
o
I
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
OF
O K LAH O F1A
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
APRIL 8, 1912
*§t
W A S H IN G T O N
GO VER N M EN T PR IN TIN G O F FIC E
1012
383G0— 10851
I
ji
r
II
EMARIvS
OF
HON.
K0 BEET
L. O W E N .
The Senate having under consideration the bill (S. 2935* to provide
for the construction, maintenance; and improvement o f post roads and
rural-delivery routes through the cooperation and join t action o f the
National Government and the several States in which such post roads
or rural-delivery routes may be established—
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P resident : Senate bill 2935. prepared by the Senator
from Virginia [Mr. Swanson ], is drawn in the light of his ex
perience as the chief executive of my old home Commonwealth
of Virginia.
This biil provides for the appropriation of $20,000,000 annu
ally for the construction, maintenance, and improvement of
post roads and rural delivery routes through the cooperation
and joint action o f the National Government and the several
States in which such roads may be established, the Nation and
State contributing equally to the cost. The value of this pro
posal is that the Federal Government mould at oner ta lc the
initiative and make available to every State the expert knowl
edge gathered together by the Federal Government on the con
struction and maintenance of good roads.
This initiative is of supreme importance. No great public
enterprise will receive proper attention unless some one is
charged w
’ith the direct duty of attending to that business.
Experience has shown that the private individual will not
take the initiative in building good roads, because the task is
too great for him, and in like manner the comity, except for
the laws passed by the State, would not initiate good roads ex
cept in special instances. But with the Federal Government
taking the initiative, inviting the State cooperation, every State
would be strongly stimulated to improve the roads. This fea
ture of this bill is of great value.
Tin? good-roads department under this bill would speedily
formulate and submit to the various States a method of co
operation which would result in coordinating the State and
Federal activities in road building upon a uniform and judicious
basis. I am sure that the people of my own State of Oklahoma
would be glad to cooperate with the Federal Government in
improving the highways and rural routes. In the constitution
of Oklahoma we established a department of highways, and
Hon. Sidney Suggs, o f Ardmore, the strenuous and able head
of this department, is actively organizing public opinion in sup
port of this the next great step in the national development of
the Republic.
Mr. President, nothing that I shall say will be either original
or novel, but the facts and the reasons should be emphasized
on the attention of the country. The improvement of the public
o
38360—10851
.
3
roads of the United States is urgently necessary for a variety
of reasons.
The national growth and prosperity must depend on good
roads.
The development o f the suburban schools, churches, mail de
livery, the intelligence and social intercourse of the country
people, the attractiveness, the value, the financial returns, and
the physical productiveness o f the farm depend upon good roads.
Cheaper food products aud cheaper manufactured products both
depend upon good roads.
Inaccessible and muddy roads cost the Nation a thousand
millions annually.
Justice to the farmer, who pays G per cent of the taxes and
O
gets but little in return, demands it. The value o f the public
school, the press, the pulpit, the platform, and all the advan
tages of civilized life depend upon access, and access upon good
roads. The extension o f trade, the improvement of the oppor
tunities to the citizen, the relief of the congestion of population
in the cities depend upon good roads.
Good roads are absolutely necessary in peace and in war.
They are the chief agency of a great industrial people for the
free interchange of the products o f labor.
T H E C O N S T IT U T IO N A L IT Y OF FEDEUAL AID TO GOOD EOADS.
It has been said that the United States has no constitutional
right to contribute to the building of good roads. I emphati
cally deny it.
Under section 8, Article I, of the Constitution, Congress is
expressly authorized to establish post roads, and is given power
“ to collect taxes,” “ to provide for the common defense and gen
eral welfare o f the United States."
The perfection of the postal highways and of the Rural Free
Delivery Service will extend post roads over every important
road in the United States upon which any national attention
need be given, and the right of the United States to provide for
the common defense carries with it the right to establish na
tional highways, as Rome did, for the movement of our national
troops in time o f war and for the "general w elfare” and the
movement of interstate commerce aud transportation in time
of peace.
The right to provide for the general welfare of the United
States sufficiently covers national aid in establishing highways
of stone as well as of steel rails throughout the United States.
Why, Mr. President, Congress authorized (he Cumberland
Road at the headwaters o f the Potomac in l^ n at a cost of
$7,000,000, and in 11 years about this period 14 great highways
were authorized to be built by Congress.
It was the generally acknowledged doctrine o f our forefathers
that the Government had this right, and from 1S50 the Govern
ment granted aid to highways with steel rails from the Missis
sippi to the Pacific coast and subsidized the Union Pacific, the
Central Pacific, the Northern Pacific, the Southern Pacific, and
gave away 200,000,000 acres of the public domain in support of
national highways.
These contributions would be worth approximately $2,(XX),000,000, which went to private persons and private corpora
tions for the building of national highways.
383G0— 10851
There is no merit in the contention that the National Govern
ment may not contribute to the support of post roads within
the States.
Down to the most recent days, since the War with Spain,
there has been expended from our National Treasury for road
building in—
A la sk a _____ ________________________ - ________________________ $1, 025, 000
Porto Itieo____________________________________________________
2, 000, 000
The Philippines._________ _____________________________________ 3, 000. 000
The Canal Zone_______________________________________:______
1, 45!) 073
T o t a l__________________________________________________
8, 384, 073
T H E URGENT N E C E S S IT Y FOR N A TIO N A L AID.
Mr. President, we have the biggest country, the finest land,
the richest people—and the poorest roads on earth. There is a
reason for this, and the reason is that our road-building system
is based on the old localized English system in the days of the
American Colonies, and has never been adequately improved
to meet the advancing knowledge of civilization.
In many of our States we still keep up the destructive and
wasteful system*of financing road building by taxing adjoining
property and administering the construction and maintenance
by utterly unskilled, intensely localized management, which is
very often too incompetent to merit consideration or defense. It
is grossly unjust to tax the farmer to build and sustain the road
which passes through his farm, when that road, in fact, is a
highway used by tens of thousands who ought to contribute
their proportionate part to the construction of the highway.
The National Government, which raises revenue by taxing
every man, and the State government, which raises its revenues
by taxing all the people, should cooperate with these taxes
levied on all the people to construct these highways which are
used by all the people just in proportion to the use o f the roads.
To compel the construction and maintenance of the main high
ways by the local citizen who has had no opportunity of being
instructed in the construction or maintenance of roads is neces
sarily to place the highways under an administration not
equipped to do this work under the safeguard of thoroughly
scientific knowledge, which is essential to proper results. Mil
lions have been squandered by this obsolete method, and the
roads remain to-day as an overwhelming witness of the incom
petence of past management. For example, under the present
laws of Texas, in a State which spends more than $8,000,000
annually on road improvement, the county judge is the one
absolute authority on road matters. Such a thing as a county
engineer, except by special act of the legislature, seems to be
unthought of.
In France, where they have the best roads in the world, at
the head of the road system there is a magnificent technical
school of roads and bridges, maintained at the expense o f the
National Government, from which graduates are chosen as high
way engineers to build and maintain the roads of France.
There is an immediate cooperation between the Republic, the
departments, and the communes as completely as an organized
army, directed by the most intelligent head possible to obtain.
At the head o f the administrative organization is a director
general of bridges and highways, under whom are the chief engi
neers, ordinary engineers, and subordinate engineers, the latter
38360— 10851
I
being equivalent in rank to noncommissioned officers in the
army. The subdivisions are under the direction of principal
conductors and ordinary conductors. Next in line come the
foremen of construction gangs, the clerks employed at head
quarters, and, finally, the patrolmen, each having from 4 to 7
kilometers of highway under his immediate supervision.
The great adm inistrative machine working in complete harmony, with
definite lines o f responsibility clearly established, accomplishes results
with m ilitary precision and regularity. In this great army of workers
not the least im portant unit is the patrolman, who has charge o f a single
section o f the road. lie keeps the ditches open, carefully fills holes and
ruts with broken stone, removes dust and deposits o f sand and earth
after heavy rains, removes the trees, shrubs, and bushes, and when
ordinary work is impossible breaks stone and transports it to the point
where it is likely to be needed. He brings all matters requiring atten
tion to the notice o f his chief.
Every detail requiring attention is carefully noted and re
ported to tlie central authorities, so that at any time the exact
condition of every foot of road throughout France may be
ascertained.
Here is a system, the best in the world, over which mag
nificent highways vast volumes of farm products find their way
at a cost of from 7 cents to 11 cents a ton per mile. Over these
roads motor cars can travel 50 miles an hour without danger.
They are beautiful. They are lined on either side by ornamental
and fruit trees. They are of great commercial value. They
lower the cost of living, both to the town and the country, by
furnishing the city with cheap food and furnishing the country
with cheap freight in transporting their products to town and
their materials back to the farm.
In France at the present time there are 23,656 miles of na
tional routes, which cost $303,975,000 to build. There are 316,898
miles of local highways, built at a cost of $308,800,000, of which
the State furnished $81,060,000 and the interested localities
$227,740,000. The roads of France are classified into five
different divisions':
First. The national routes, traversing the various departments
and connecting important centers of population.
Second. The department routes, connecting the important
centers o f a single department and bisecting the national routes.
Third. Highways of general communication, little less impor
tant than the previous class.
Fourth. Highways of public interest, traversing a single can
ton and connecting remote villages with more important roads.
Fifth. Private roads.
In the German Empire a similar system prevails, and these
great nations, including the other nations of Europe, for that
matter, set. an example to the people of the United States which
they would do well to follow.
In England they have a much more localized system, and in
consequence there is in England the most striking example of
lack of uniformity of road work and of excessive expenditure
in proportion to mileage.
The most perfect road system, however, is that of France,
which has the most highly centralized management of all the
road systems.
It is not my purpose, Mr. President, to go into detail with
regard to the best methods of construction, but only to point out
the extreme importance of centralized initiative and •centralized
knowledge proceeding with efficiency upon a fixed basis.
38360— 10851
G
I do not regard Senate bill 2935, which I advocate, as neces
sarily an absolutely perfect bill, but I do regard it as a step of
very great importance, and I do believe that out o f this meas
ure, if it be enacted into a law, we would enter upon a proper
system.
I believe we should have a legislative reference bureau (for
which I have heretofore contended), for the convenience of
Congress in digesting and arranging - data and making pre
liminary drafts o f bills and which in this case might thoroughly
work out a perfected plan suitable to the use of the United
States under our particular form o f government, providing a
system for the most perfect cooperation between the National
and State Governments for the development o f good roads in
this couutry.
T H E C O M M E R C IA L VALU E OF GOOD ROADS.
Mr. Halbert F. Gillette, an engineer of ability, has with great
pains estimated the cost o f hauling agricultural products to and
from the farm. (S. Doc. No. 204, 60th Cong., 2d sess., p. 56.)
The average haul in the United States is 12 miles o f 2,000
pounds at a cost of 25 cents a ton, on an average of $3 a ton
for delivering farm products from the farm to the railway.
In France the cost of hauling a ton a mile is 7 cents and in
Germany and England from 9 cents to 12 cents. The direct loss
on the tonnage actually hauled in the United States is perfectly
enormous. The Interstate Commerce Commission reports show
that the railroads handle upward of 900.000.000 tons of freight,
of which 32 per cent, or approximately 275,000,000 tons, are the
products of forest, field, and miscellany.
Estimating only 200,000,000 tons at a cost of $3 a ton. we
have $600,000,000 in this item, of which over $400,000,000 is a
flat loss, due to bad roads; but these figures are only a fraction
of the haul. To this must be added the enormous tonnage hauled
from farm to farm, from farm to village, from farm to town,
from farm to canals, wharves, and docks for shipment by water.
The unemployed land, the defectively developed land, the wasted
products not hauled because o f the expense and o f impassable
roads, the lack of intensive farming at any distance from cities
because of the expensive hauling are grave factors of the huge
loss due to bad roads. The loss by bad roads upon any reason
able basis would probably exceed $1,000,000,000 per annum, or
the cost of conducting our National Government.
We have bad roads standing as a barrier, preventing the
hauling of products from the farm, because the cost of hauling
is too high and products are wasted on the farm.
Lands distant from market are not cultivated at all and
farms reasonable near to the markets are not put into crops
which would be productive of large bulk, because of the
ruinous expense of hauling such products, and for this rea
son there are huge areas uncultivated in the United States, esti
mated by the Department of Agriculture at over 400,000,000
acres. Improved roads would develop this vast domain and
make food products cheaper. It would lead to intensive and
more extended farming. Where the average value is $S.72 per
acre o f wheat, $7.03 an acre o f corn, the value of vegetables in
1S99 was $42 an acre and of small fruits $80 an acre.
The commercial value of good roads, therefore, would mean a
saving of^a thousand million dollars annually. It would mean
38360— 10851
bringing into cultivation vast areas o f land now uncultivated.
It would bring intensive farming on the lands which are now
cultivated. It would mean very much cheaper food products.
If would mean the improved financial, social, religious, and edu
cational condition o f the farmers.
It would mean a vast increase in the farming population
drawn from the congested cities for the benefit of city and
country alike.
IT W O ULD IN C R E A SE T H E VALU E OF FARM
LAND.
We have about 850.000,000 acres of farm land improved and
unimproved in the United States.
The good roads will exercise a tremendous influence over in
creasing the value of farm lands accessible to good roads.
By “ accessible” it must not be understood as being imme
diately on a perfected highway. It is an important fact that a
team of horses for two hours out of a (tun can exert about four
times their average tractive force without injury. For this
reason they may pull a heavy load for 3 or 4 mile's over a dirt
road to a perfect highway without injury, and then carry the
heavy load easily to market a long distance without harm, so
that the farmers within 3 or 4 miles on either side of a good
highway would lie directly benefited by it; and with the King
drag road leading off 4 or 5 miles on either side of a perfected
highway all of the farmers of the country could be brought in
touch with good roads at a minimum expense to the great in
crease of their farm-land values.
BAD ROADS M E A N S L O SS OF P O PU LA TIO N .
The sections of country which have lost in population by the
last census are conspicuous for impassable roads. In 25 coun
ties, for example, selected at random by the United States Office
of Public Itoads, the population between 18<X) and 1900 fell
away over 3.000 persons in each county where the roads showed
an average of only 1$ per cent of improved roads, while in an
other 25 counties, in which there was an average o f 40 per cent
of improved roads, the population in each county had increased
over 31,000.
It is density of population and accessibility of land which in
crease the value of land.
GOOD ROADS
MEAN BETTER SCH O O L S AND C H U R C H E S .
Improved roads mean improved schools and churches. Where
the roads are very bad the children can not easily attend school,
nor can the people easily attend the churches, but with good
roads they could do so. In the States of Massachusetts. Rhode
Island, Connecticut, Ohio, and Indiana, in which, in 1004, about
35 per cent of the roads were improved. 77 out of each 100
pupils enrolled attended the schools regularly; but in the five
States of Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Georgia, and South
Dakota, which had, in 1004, only 1.5 per cent of good roads,
only 59 out o f each 100 pupils enrolled could attend public
schools regularly. Thus good roads enable 30 per cent more
children to attend school.
T H E I'R E SE N T CONDITION OF T H E P U B L IC ROADS.
We have to-day 2,155,000 miles of public roads within the
United States. Less than 180,000 miles are macadamized or
improved with hard surfacing.
More than nine-tenths of the public roads and highways of
the United States in the rainy season are almost unfit for use,
38360—10851
8
and a large part in a very rainy season are utterly unfit for use
and impassable, to the grave injury o f the farmer and the equal
injury of the toicn people who depend upon him for regular
supplies of food.
*
*•
>
In some o f the States improved State methods are being put
into force, but the department o f good roads of the United States
Government should be stimulated in the highest degree, so as to
furnish the people of the United States with full information upon
the important commercial, financial, educational, and social as
pects of this great national problem. The department should
be put in a position where it can stimulate public attention and
bring all of the States into harmony with this great scientific
problem. Hoad building and road maintenance is a great
science. It has taken generations of men to learn the best
methods of road building and maintenance, and the highest
knowledge in the world in scientific road building should he
placed at the disposal of the humblest citizens o f this Republic
so that he could be a direct beneficiary o f the advancement of
human knowledge in this respect.
T H E RELATIO N OF P U B L IC ROADS TO T H E F ARM ER.
Farm life should be made more attractive. No matter how
fertile the land or how favorable the climate, if the farmer is
imprisoned by bad roads, he can not enjoy fully farm life. He
can not conveniently reach the school, the church, the town, or
his friendly neighbors if the roads are very bad.
We can not expect the greatest social, moral, mental, and
material development of the farmer if the roads are bad.
Only 8.2 per cent of the total road mileage of the United States
is improved at the present time, yet we expended approximately
$79,000,000 in work on roads in 19<H. The expenditure has
been entirely out of proportion to the results accomplished. The
reason for this I have pointed out. It is due to the extreme
localization, bad road laws, bad administration, and lack of
coordination. W e have little skilled supervision, with but few
men with a knowledge of road building or of any profound
interest in it. The laws must be changed, and they can only
be changed and greatly improved by instructing the public mind
and public men.
The profit of the fa>mer is represented by the difference be
tween the cost o f production and transportation and the selling
price. I f he can cut the transportation in half, he will materially
benefit himself financially; and if the cost of transportation
could be reduced ?G<X).000,000. the farmer would easily be bene
fited to the extent o f one-half of this saving, granting that the
city inhabitants would benefit by the other half of the saving.
We complain of the high cost of living, and do not suffi
ciently analyze the reasons for the high cost. Lower trans
portation means lower cost o f living, both to the farmer and
city resident
We should perfect the national waterways likewise and con
trol the railways to lower the cost o f transportation.
The mean cost of carrying wheat from New York to Liver
pool— by icater 3,100 miles— is only 3.8 cents per bushel, while
it costs the farmer on an average more than that to haul his
wheat to the railway station.
The consular reports show that hauling in Germany, France,
and England is frequently as low as 7 and 8 cents a ton a mile,
and rarely higher than 13 cents.
38360— 10851
The cost on fair earth roads is 25 cents a ton per mile; on
earth roads containing ruts, 39 cents; on sandy roads when
wet, 32 cents; on sandy roads when dry, 64 cents; on black
gumbo when thoroughly wet passing is impossible. Steep
grades on the roads is another serious tax on transportation,
because “ the chain is no stronger than the weakest link.”
If the farmer has good roads, he can take to the town two
or three times as much in a load as he does now. lie could
haul to town from a distance two or three times as great as
he does now. He could haul to town products which now are
prohibited by the exi>ense of hauling. He could raise a larger
variety of products suitable for marketing. He would be
directly benefited by making the town, the people, and the school
more accessible.
He would be benefited by making his neighbors easier of
access, and in that way his social pleasure and personal happi
ness would be increased.
lie would be able to deliver his farm products to the town
every day in the year, and therefore would have a steady mar
ket throughout the year for his products, whereas he may be
by muddy roads excluded for two and three months at a time
from his market, and the town people in like manner may be
deprived of vegetables, fowl, eggs, milk, and other farm products
which are essential to their comfort.
In Bradley County, Tenn., bonds were issued for 160 miles
of excellent macadam roads, and lands that were valueless
before these roads were built now find ready purchasers at
from $35 to $30 per acre.
EF F E C T OF ROAD IM P R O V E M E N T ON T R A F F IC .
If the roads were improved, traffic would not be congested
at one season and very limited at another season, because the
transportation of the crops could be made at convenience and
uniformly without the interruptions of bad weather. The
railroads could, therefore, maintain a more regular service
with a smaller equipment, fewer employees, and less cost of
operation. This means cheaper freight rate for all the people
and lower cost of living.
I have not taken into account the wear and tear on teams
due to bad roads, the destruction of wagons and vehicles, the
danger to life and limb from bad roads.
the
r e l a t io n
of good roads to t h e p u b l ic h e a l t h .
If the roads are perfectly good, the physician or surgeon can
with the modern motor car go to the aid of one in dauger of
death almost immediately, but when the roads are impassable
death might ensue before relief could be obtained. If the
roads are wet and bad and children inarch to school with wet
and muddy feet, their vitality is lowered and loss of life must
ensue.
t h e d if f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e c it y a n d t iik c o u n t r y .
Many men complain that there has been a steady movement
from country to city. The reason is plain. The city is more
attractive to live in because it has perfect roads of asphalt,
macadam, and Belgian block, and concrete sidewalks. No per
son need to have his feel muddy in going from one point to an
other. In the city is concentrated many of the things that
human beings desire, but if the country had good roads it
would be a more desirable place to live in than the city. The
38360— 10851
10
countryman 1ms good air, free from dust and smoke. He is
away from tlie roaring noise of tlie city and the everlasting
grind of the wheels o f the street car. In the country he has
his own fresh food, prepared by nature, at his hand; poultry,
eggs, fresh milk, cream, butter, fresh vegetables of all kinds,
and fresh fruits—peace, young animal life to interest and
please him, and nature smiling back in his face and giving him
10,000. per cent for every seed he plants. With good roads he
can come to the city when he likes and go back to his peaceful,
pleasant home, satisfied.
City life enervates and weakens human beings, as a rule, be
cause of the nervous strain of city life, while in the country a
man grows strong, with steady nerves, good lungs, and brawny
limbs. The conditions of country life should be made more
attractive. The social intercourse and pleasure o f country
people, proper school facilities, and church advantages should
be made available with good roads. From the country has
sprung the greatest men of genius and patriotism. Nearly half
of all of our people are engaged in agriculture, and they furnish
half of the taxes and produce three-fourths of the wealth of
the Nation. I am in favor, for their sakes, of stimulating tlie
building of good roads, but let us remember that the building of
good roads is just as important to the city man who lives on the
produce o f the country as it is to the countryman who raises
that food supply. It is of equal importance and value to both
the residents of the city and of the country. It is of equal im
portance to the professional man and to the laborer, to the
farmer and the city merchant, to the producer and the con
sumer. It means lower cost o f living to all. It means great
commercial and financial advantage to all. It means greater
pleasure and enjoyment of life to all.
Many of our Government expenditures are made without re
turn, but here is a magnificent investment, which, if it were
based upon the credit system, would pay 15 per cent on every
dollar judiciously invested and would add to our national wealth
more rapidly than any other national investment into which we
could invest our national credit or our national energies. The
experience o f other States has shown the importance of the
State taking the initiative and guiding the activities of the
counties and in this way getting greater results. This has been
fully explained by the Senator from Virginia as the experience
in that State.
AN AVENUE TO E M PL O Y T H E U N EM PLO YED .
If we had this system established we could give employment
to the unemployed at rates that would not attract men already
engaged but would attract men out of work and in need. There
are hundreds o f thousands o f men o f this class available.
Mr. President, this bill ought to be immediately reported and
passed. I remind Republicans that public sentiment has so far
crystallized that in their national platform of 1908 they cor
dially indorsed aid to good roads in the following language:
W e recognize tlie social and economic advantages of good country
roads, maintained m o re and more largely at public expense and less
and less at the expense of the abutting property owner. In this work
we commend the growing practice o f the National Agricultural Depart
ment by experiment and otherwise to make clear to the public the best
methods of road construction.
And I remind my brother Democrats that in our last plat
form we had the following plank.
38360— 10851
11
POST BOADS.
We favor Federal aid to State and local authorities in the construc
tion and maintenance of post roads.
Let us fulfill in good faith our party pledges.
T H E VALU E OP IN T E N S IV E F A B M IN G ----
“ BAC K
TO T H E LitN D.”
“ Gentlemen, it would be impossible to exaggerate the im
portance of the objects contemplated by the National Farm Land
Congress.
“ In 40 years we shall have over 200,000,000 people, and this
estimate does not fully take into account the geometric pro
gression which immigration makes probable under the enormous
growth of seagoing vessels of mammoth size.
“ Our breadstuff exports in 25 years has decreased 24 per
cent, notwithstanding large areas of new lands producing wheat
and corn.
“ Our home demand for wheat in a quarter of a century has
grown 80 per cent more than the supply of wheat.
“ The object contemplated by the National Farm Land Con
gress is to develop farm lands, encourage home building on the
farm, increase the productiveness o f our farm land, make our
farms more accessible by the building of good roads and im
proved national and local highways, and make our farms a
potential factor in promoting the wealth, the health, the beauty,
and happiness of the Nation. Nothing could be of greater
national importance.
“ With these objects I find myself deeply in sympathy. One
of my earliest recollections was of the intensive farming of a
piece of land in Lynchburg, Va., o f about
acres, surrounded
by a high brick w a ll; the inclosed land was divided up into a
dozen or more plots of ground, with graveled walks lined in cer
tain parts of the garden with dwarf box and with llowers.
“ Some of the squares were used for vegetables, Irish and
sweet potatoes, beets, parsnips, salsify, okra, radishes, onions,
lettuce, cabbage, mustard, asparagus, tomatoes, several kinds of
sweet corn, the watermelon, cantaloupe, and sweet pumpkin for
cooking, rhubarb, and other succulents. Other beds against the
brick wall had beds of strawberries, raspberries, blackberries,
currants, gooseberries, and various vines.
“ Even in the winter this land furnished the table with vege
tables stored in sand pits, and with fruits preserved and canned,
and with pickles, marmalades, and other things edible.
“ I remember sweet herbs in this garden—of thyme, sage, etc.
I recall with affection certain arbors devoted to the grape,
which, in their season, had a special charm for me. Around the
edge of these squares were many beautiful varieties of fruit—of
peaches, of pears, the sweet Sickle, the Royal Bartlett, the Dam
son, the plum, the cherry, the apple. The yellow June apples
in that garden were sweet enough to tempt, and often did tempt,
a small boy about my size to risk an appearance before the
Throne of Grace without any other preparation than an incredi
ble number of June apples eaten in reckless disregard of conse
quences.
“ I have never seen anywhere a more beautiful variety of
hyacinths and tulips than grew in this garden, with all the oldfashioned English flowers—the jonquil, the narcissus, the crocus,
the lilies of the valley, the phlox, the snapdragon, and many
others; the Easter lily, the tiger lily, and a great variety of
roses.
*
1
l
38360— 10S51
■
l
“ I remember the yellow and red honeysuckle, covering a trellised summerhouse, mingling its fragrance with the pleasant
odors of the climbing rose which helped to cover it.
“ As I used to enter this charming spot of land from the dining
room door. I recall passing between two trees of crepe myrtle and,
a few steps farther on. by two large shrubs of the euonymus.
There were several large box trees in the garden, whose thick
cover afforded a hiding place for many birds, whose twilight
repose I used to disturb for my amusement by shaking the trees.
“ There was in this garden a large clump o f cane which fur
nished the boys o f the place with convenient fishing rods, and
everywhere throughout this 2 acres was manifest the highest
intelligence, the finest taste, and unceasing industry.
“ The guardian spirit of this garden was my mother, under
whose hand everything which grew out of the ground always
flourished. I have always thought that the ministering angels
who supervise the growth of plants must have specially loved
the gracious spirit of my mother, for her plants lived, no matter
what happened to the gardens of other people. I shall never be
satisfied until I am able to own and to enjoy such a garden as
she had, and with which she made my boyhood days happy.
Adjacent to the garden was a big smokehouse where we put up
our own meat, and a yard where the chickens and ducks flour
ished and helped to feed the family.
“ I may be forgiven these personal reminiscences when I point
to the fact that this two acres and a half of land furnished a
very large household with the greatest abundance of food in the
form of vegetables, fruits, berries, grapes, throughout the year,
as well as with an abundance of beautiful flowers. It was in
tensive farming. Every foot of the ground was kept thoroughly
manured, the plants were transplanted from time to time where
their nature required it, and the life habits o f every plant were
studied and thoroughly understood.
“ In contrast to the productive power of this two and one-half
acres, I have seen, in Indian Territory, a poor farmer trying to
cultivate enormous areas of land with a single team, and with
the invariable result that his crop was so poor as to afford him
and his family not even the necessaries of life, much less its
conveniences or the luxury of fruits and flowers. Such a
farmer, with bad and muddy roads to travel, is practically
isolated from the market, from the school, from the church, and
from other conveniences and pleasures of civilized life, and
can not conveniently or cheaply deliver to market even those
things which he does raise.
“ The man who works more land than he can cultivate thor
oughly well wastes his time; he does more: He makes life uphappy for himself, for the faithful woman who loves him, and
for the little children who look to him for guidance. He is not
as useful nor as happy a citizen as he would be if he concen
trated himself on 40 acres, cultivated a garden, kept a few cows
for milk and butter, raised chickens and other fowls and do
mestic animals out of which the profits of the farm arise.
CO M P A R ISO N
W IT H
EN GLAN D , G E R M A N Y , AND FRANCE.
“ In England, Germany, France. Belgium, and Holland the
people obtain much higher results than in the United States.
The average wheat production of Great Britain is over 32
bushels to the acre, and in the United States only a little over
13 bushels to the acre.
38360— 10S.11
13
“ I spent the summer in Germany and France, and there I
saw that every foot of the ground was thoroughly cultivated.
It was divided up into very small tracts, and off at a distance
would look like strips of carpet laid upon the rolling fields.
There was constant rotation of crops; they were busily engaged
in fertilizing with manures, making the ground richer. The
farm roads were in splendid condition, and thousands of miles
of surveyed, carefully leveled and graded turnpikes afforded
the farmer cheap transportation, so that a single team might
move 4 or 5 tons with less difficulty than half a ton could be
moved by the same team on some of the terrible roads in the
United States. What an object lesson to the people of the
United States are these splendid roads, which increase the value
of the farm, bring the farmer nearer to every convenience of
civilized life, make his products more valuable, and make the
conditions of life much more attractive.
“ Along these roads I observed miles o f fruit trees, the cherry,
the apple, the pear, and every one of them marked with a num
ber indicating ownership.
“ I think I never saw a house so poor that it did not have its
vegetable garden and its garden o f flowers.
“ In coming from Fifty-seventh Street down to the Audi
torium, on the Illinois Central, the back lots of the American
homes, seen from the cars, shabby, dirty, and unkempt, are
absolutely distressing and shocking to those who have i>ositive
views in regard to making land either useful or beautiful.
“ Every such back lot in Germany and France and England or
Belgium or Holland would be a valuable vegetable garden
ornamented with flowers. We can be engaged in no better busi
ness than in leading our people back to the use, and the perfect
use, of our most precious heritage—the land. Let us get back
to the land.
T1IU VALUE OF T H E
F ARM
AS
A
N A TIO N A L
RESOURCE.
“ Our farms produced last year eight thousand millions of
created wealth. Our cotton crop alone furnished enough export
cotton to give us a balance of trade in our favor. The output of
the American farm, by proper cultivation, could, however, be
immediately doubled, and by reclaiming waste places with
proper cultivation, could easily produce over twenty billions of
wealth per annum—a sum about equal to the total accumulation
of a century in the banking resources in all of our 25,000 banks.
“ The work of such men as Luther Burbank, of Santa Rosa,
Cal., in improving plant life has a value of which our people
generally have had an adequate conception.
“ In Oklahoma a new plant has been developed from the com
mon seeding Bermuda, called the “ Hardy Bermuda,” which has
great national value. It has been developed by careful selection
of plants which have withstood severe freezing. The plant has
as good nutritive quality as timothy; it comes up early in the
spring; it has a root over a foot deep; it grows almost as thick
as the hair on the head; it grows luxuriantly in the face of dry
weather; will successfully stand the most extreme drouth; is
not killed by many days o f overflow; will grow on alkali spots
and in the sand. It will produce a very large amount o f food
to the acre, and is an excellent grazing grass. It is impossible
to exaggerate the value of a plant of this character, which will
convert land heretofore unproductive into productive areas of
38360— 10851
14
great value. Our people must have food, aud this plant will
produce great food supplies from land heretofore producing
nothing. We must emphasize making onr lands more productive
by using proper suitable plant life and concentrating labor on
the land.
IM P R O V E M E N T OF T H E N A TIO N A L H E A L T H .
“ The annual death rate o f New Zealand is nine to a thousand,
and of the various Australian States, ten to a thousand. In the
United States it is over sixteen to a thousand—00 per cent more
than in Australia. If our people can be led back to the farm,
where they can get plenty of fresh air, fresh vegetables, milk
and butter, and chickens, we will save these lives which now
amount to over a half million beings per annum in excess of
what it ought to be.
“ The tables o f mortality show that this high death rate is
very largely due to the bad housing, bad food, and bad sanitary
conditions o f the very poor in our congested cities.
“ In the tight on tuberculosis abundant fresh air has been
demonstrated to be essential to a recovery. Abundant fresh air
is essential to keep people well who are not now sick, and is all
the more important when they become afflicted with the ex
tremely dangerous tubercle bacillus. Let us encourage our peo
ple to get back to the land, aud we shall greatly improve the
national health.
IM P R O V E M E N T
IN
S E L F -R E L IA N C E AND O TH ER
MORAL Q U A L IT IE S .
“ In cultivating the land, all o f the moral qualities are stimu
lated, independence, self-reliance, initiative, courage, honesty of
mind. In working on the land, a man is able to provide his own
com fort; he can build his own house with his own hands; he
can supply every article of food he needs, and create a surplus
sufficient to buy other things. He receives nothing for which
he does not give an equivalent; he promotes his own comfort,
his own self-respect, and his own dignity. The greatest men of
the Nation have come from the farm. The man on the farm,
who is cultivating a small piece o f land of his own, need have
no fear o f beiug suddenly discharged by his employer and left
with a family on his hands to feed, and no means to buy food or
pay rent until he finds another job. On the farm there is no
danger in losing his job.
“ This gives a man courage, self-reliance, and those moral
qualities which go to make up good citizenship. Without the
private virtue of the individual citizen our Republic can not
rise to its great and honorable destiny. Let us get back to the
land. Let us improve the roads that lead to the farm and from
the farm and give the farm greater attractiveness because of
its accessibility to the towns and cities.
T H E VALU E OF S M A L L H O L D IN G S.
“ The French Revolution was due to the abuse of the unre
stricted land holdings of the nobility, from which vast incomes
were derived, thus leading to a great extravagance o f the landholding class in the face of the extreme poverty and misery of
the unemployed landless masses. The landholders were so rich
they did not need to use the land in full, but devoted very large
areas to game preserves, while the poorer French people, who
had also been brought into the world by the hand of the Om
nipotent, were denied access to the land by the landlords, who
preferred to see their estates used in large part for purposes
38360— 10851
15
of amusement, as hunting parks. The French law, of course,
sustained the French landlord until the corrupt extravagance
of the landholding class and the abject hunger and misery of
the multitudes led to the overthrow o f the laws which permitted
this condition, and the bloody French Revolution followed.
“ The revolution resulted in the subdivision of France into
small landholdings, which, under the laws of inheritance, was
still further subdivided.
“ The result of this subdivision has been intensive cultiva
tion and great agricultural wealth from the soil of France,
making it one of the richest nations in the world. The reverse
of this policy is seen in Spain and Mexico, where huge estates
have been permitted to exist, with the unavoidable result that
the productive capacity of the land has not been developed, and
where the extremes of great wealth and abject poverty are in
more marked contrast than in any other civilized country,
“ The United States should pursue a policy of small landholdings, and the State of Oklahoma has led the way by pass
ing laws imposing a progressive tax on large holdings of land,
for the purpose of stimulating actual home building, of pro
moting the greatest productive capacity of the land, and for the
abatement of the nuisance and danger o f large landed monopoly.
“ The smaller subdivision of land will lead, therefore, directly
to its intensive cultivation, and just in degree as the lands are
thoroughly well cultivated, just in that degree will the value of
farm lands increase, and with the increase in the value of farm
lands, and the growth of their productions, just in that degree
will city property and suburban property increase in value.
“ Likewise, this will lead to the building of good roads, and to
the increase of the liberty, of the independence, and of the
personal happiness o f all of our people, both on the farm and
in the cities. Our cities are sadly congested and millions of
people could be led to the farm, both to their own welfare and
to the advantage of the Nation. The pimp, the cadet, the white
woman slave would be more useful and happier as an honest
plowman, gardener, and milkmaid.
“ T H E R E I S A CH AItM ABOUT T H E FARM .
“ Under proper conditions nothing can be more beautiful or
more attractive than the farm life. In times past with bad
roads and muddy weather, and fields too big for the farmer to
cultivate successfully, men have often worked themselves down,
have grown weary, have made themselves poor, by ill-directed
effort, and have made themselves, their wives, and children sor
rowful and miserable in consequence. Under such conditions
the farm has often been like a prison instead of being a place
of liberty, prosperity, and happiness. The boys and girls have
too often been glad to leave the farm to get away from its dull
routine and solitude. Rut the time has come when there should
be a complete reversal of all this. We have learned how to
avoid these things and the valuable lesson should be universally
taught and made a common heritage.
“ Let the man— if he have too much land—sow his excess in
grass, in hardy Bermuda ; let him confine himself to what he can
thoroughly cultivate; use only plant life suitable to the seasons,
as kaffir corn and mllo maize for dry weather, and learn how
to do the work w ell; let him surround himself with a beautiful
garden; let the women and children be taught to love these
things and the farm will become a lovely home.
38360— 10851
16
“ It’s a good thing to keep the children on the farm, away
from the temptations and evil suggestions that surround them
on every hand in the city. In the light o f modern invention,
with our wonderful modern transportation, with electric rail
roads running everywhere, with rural mail delivery, with cheap
power, heat, and light, with improving values in farm products,
with cheapening goods of every description, every family man
should have a piece of land, if it is only 10 acres, or 1 acre,
upon which he might surround himself with the fragrance and
the blossom and the fruit o f plant life, where lie might raise
healthy, happy children. What can be more beautiful, or more
valuable than a well-kept vegetable garden, tilled with all
kinds of foods of every flavor—filled with berries and grapes,
and trees bearing fruits and nuts, and ornamented with the
endless procession of flowers each advancing season affords?
“ What more attractive than to be surrounded by the young
and cheerful life of the farm—young chickens, ducks, turkeys,
calves, lambs, pigs, colts, and last but not least, the opportunity
to have a few good dogs, whose love and companionship is not
the least of the attractions of the farm.
“ ‘ Back to the farm ’ should be the bugle call to the youth of
our land.
“ Back to the farm, where peace and quiet and sound, refresh
ing sleep follows happy labor, where we can hear the birds,
'singing their songs of thanksgiving in the early morning among
blossoming trees, where homely joys can give a life of happiness,
where men and women grow sound of heart and strong of limb
and nerve.
“ Back to the farm, with the friendly brute for neighbor.
Where honest content will make amends for every city glamour.
“ I should like to see an agricultural school of practical in
struction and of plant and seed distribution in every agricul
tural county in the United States, where the care of cattle and
horses and sheep and swine and domestic fowl and the econo
mies of farm life and its productive capacity should be prop
erly taught; where the great lesson might be taught and em
phasized by the Government—both National and State—that
there is no profession more honorable than farming, and that
no occupation is of such vital importance to the wealth and
health of the Nation.
“ I rejoice at an opportunity of giving expression before the
National Farm Land Congress of the deep interest which I fee!
in this matter, and I trust that this congress may be the begin
ning o f an organization which will emphasize in the most pow
erful manner the importance o f the farm to our national wealth
and to our national health and happiness.
“ This congress should, above all things, emphasize the great
importance o f good roads to and from the farms of the country.
It should encourage State and National aid to good roads, so as
to bring to the expenditure on road building the greatest degree
of intelligence and efficiency and concentrated effort. This is,
perhaps, the most important factor of all in making the farm
more desirable to the people, in making the farm more attrac
tive, in making it more remunerative, and giving to it those
elements which are necessary and essential to peace of mind
and to the prosperity and happiness o f the farmer.”
38360— 10851
o
V
RECALL OF JUDGES
T H E P O N T IU S P I L A T E D E C IS IO N
The common people were not responsible for the crucifixion of Christ
by overruling Pontius Pilate. The common people would have recalled
Pontius Pilate for his wicked decision in delivering Christ for cruci
fixion at the demand of the machine politicians in the temple at
Jerusalem. The common people heard Him gladly. They lamented
the wicked conduct of Pilate, and they treasured the words of the
Savior so that they never have been forgotten.
SPEECH
OF
P I 0 1ST. E O B E E T
OF
.
E.
OAVEIST
OKLAHOM A
IN THE
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
APRIL 10, 1912
*
W ASH INGTO N
1912
38735— 10850
SPEECH
OF
I I ON. R O B E R T
L. O WE N .
The Senate having under consideration Senate hill No. 3175, Mr. Owen re
plied to the argument of the Senator from Washington, who argued that the
decision of the Senate in the Lorimer case was purely a judicial question, to
he decided by the Senate as judges free from the influence or popular clamor
or public sentiment, and who criticized Theodore Roosevelt for advocating the
recall by the people o f a court judgment in certain constitutional cases, and
stated that this would be going back to the precedent of Pontius Pilate, where
the people were permitted to overrule the judgment of Pilate, who found Christ
innocent.
Mr. OWEN said:
Mr. P r e s id e n t : I do not agree with the Senator from Washington
[Mr. J o n es ] that this is merely a judicial question. On the contrary,
J believe that the Lorimer case should be determined as a legislative
question, the Senate of the United States determining for itself
under the rule and under the law its own membership, and that it
should be guided in its determination of the question of Mr. L orim er
retaining his seat by the best interests of this Republic.
Regardless of the question as to whether Mr. L orim er was guilty
of personal corruption, and regardless of whether or not Mr. L o ri
m er knew of corruption in the Legislature of Illinois, I believe, pro
vided always that there was established by competent evidence
proof of corruption in the purchase of a single vote in obtaining this
seat for Mr. L o r im e r , that the election should be declared void. In
no other way can the power of corruption be so effectually and ade
quately checked in electing Senators under the present system.
Mr. President, the Senator from Washington has ventured to
repeat on the floor of the United States Senate the precedent of
Pontius Pilate delivering Christ to be crucified as an example of the
folly of permitting the judgment of the common people to prevail
over the decision or conduct of an upright judge. This Pontius
Pilate precedent has been repeated many times in the public press
recently as an argument against the progressive program of “ the
rule of the people” in this country. This argument implies that
Pontius Pilate was a fair example of an upright judge who was com
pelled to yield to the clamor of the unthinking people—to “ the in
flamed opinion of the multitude,” as the Senator from Washington
says. I take issue with the Senator from Washington in his appar
ent interpretation of the Pontius Pilate precedent. I believe in the
recall of such a judge as Pontius Pilate.
Mr. JONES. Mr. President-----The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Washington
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Washington.
38735— 10856
3
4
Mr. JONES. I will say to the Senator that he and I might not be
far apart on that proposition.
Mr. OWEN. I am glad to know that we are together on some
proposition.
Mr. JONES. I am myself in favor of the recall, the initiative,
and referendum within proper restrictions, within State lines, but I
do not think that question was at all involved in what I said.
Mr. OWEN. I should even prefer the recall of the unjust judg
ment of Pontius Pilate rather than to allow to stand his criminal
decision of yielding innocence to murder.
Mr. JONES. Mr. President-----The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield further to the Senator from Washington?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Washington.
Mr. JONES. It seems to me the Senator fails to appreciate just
the position I took. My position is that Pontius Pilate should not
have yielded at all, but should have sacrificed his office and his life
if necessary to avoid the conviction of a man whom he thought was
innocent.
Mr. OWEN. I agree with that view of the Senator from Wash
ington, but the fact is that this judge did not do that. This wicked
judge sent to death the innocent prisoner at the bar before him, and
the common people are wrongfully charged with his political crime
r
by those using the Pontius Pilate precedent.
Mr. JONES. Mr. President-----The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield further to the Senator from Washington?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Washington.
Mr. JONES. The only difference between Pontius Pilate and
myself on that proposition is that I am not going to yield to the
clamor.
Mr. OWEN. I congratulate the Senator from Washington on
having established an important difference between himself and
Pontius Pilate.
In the first place, Pontius Pilate was not an upright judge. He
was a stand-pat, pie-counter politician from the house of Tiberius
Caesar, serving as governor in Judea under the patronage system of
the Roman Empire.
Mr. JONES. Mr. President-----The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield further to the Senator from Washington?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Washington.
Mr. JONES. The only fault that I have to find with Pontius
Pilate’s stand-pat proclivities is that when it was necessary to stand
pat he became a progressive.
Mr. OWEN. He had but little conception of justice or mercy,
Mr. President, or of the progressive movement of to-day, which
stands for equal rights to all; but he well understood how to stand
pat with the political machine in Rome and in Jerusalem that gave
special privileges to him and his allies at the expense of the common
people. His master, Tiberius, under whom he was trained, found
amusement in having men and wild beasts fight to the death in the
arena at Rome for his entertainment. When Jesus Christ was
38735— 10856
5
brought before Pontius Pilate and Pilate found no wrong in him,
the chief priests falsely charged Christ with seeking to be “ King
of the Jews ” and threatened Pilate as an office holder. “ If thou
let this man go, thou art not Caesar’s friend. Whosoever maketh
himself a king speaketh against Caesar.”
Then it was that this governor, this political judge from Rome, the
direct product of political patronage, yielded the innocent prisoner
at the bar to be crucified in the face of justice and the prayers of his
own good wife to save himself from possible inconvenience or mis
representation at Rome, and he was sufficiently a villain that he wrote
a false title and put it on the cross:
Jesus o f Nazareth, the King o f the Jews.
(John xix, 19.)
Pilate’s wife advised him to mercy and justice.
a dishonorable part in the crucifixion of our Lord.
N o woman
had
Not she with traitorous kiss her Savior stung,
Not she denied Him witli unholy tongue,
She, when apostles shrunk, could dangers brave,
Last at the cross and earliest at the grave.
This unspeakable scoundrel, who ended his base career by suicide,
is held up by the standpatters who use the Pontius Pilate precedent
as a model judge, who wanted to do right, and the comm on people
are charged with being to blame for his infamous crime.
The common people were not responsible for the death of Christ.
They in reality admired and loved Christ. It is of record in St. Mark
(xii, 37) that “ the common people heard Him gladly,” and through
out the Scriptures it is manifest that great multitudes of the com
mon people surrounded Jesus and hung upon His teachings, which,
though not recorded, were so engraved in the memory of those same
common people who heard Him that the wonderful prophecy of
Christ after nineteen hundred years is still verified—
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away
(Matt, xxiv, 35.)
The chief priests had soldiers employed to watch the grave of
Christ to keep the common people from removing the body, and the
common people —the fishermen, the sailors, the laborers, the farmers
of Judea—instead of condemning Him to death, treasured His words
in their hearts, although they could not read and could not write,
and treasured these words so faithfully that they were handed
down from generation to generation until they have converted the
whole world to the wisdom and beauty of His teachings. And I
remind the Senator from Washington that the essence o f the doctrine
o f Christ is the m oving force now o f the progressive m ovem ent in
I m erica and throughout the world. It is the doctrine of the broth
A
erhood of man. The doctrine of altruism. The doctrine of service.
It is a doctrine which was utterly opposed to the system of govern
ment in Judea in the days of Pontius Pilate, which Christ expressly
criticized and condemned. He opposed the exercise of unjust au
thority by the rulers over the people, and advised His followers to
the contrary in the following words:
But it shall not be so among you; but whosoever will be great among you,
let him be your m inister; and whosoever will be chief among y«^u, let him be
your servant. (Matt, xx, 20-27.)
38735— 10856
6
This is the doctrine of the progressive movement in the United
States—that the people shall rule and the official shall be a minister,
a servant', and not a ruler.
The truth is the people did not exercise the power to rule in Judea.
Christ Himself, in speaking to Ilis disciples, reminded them of this
fact:
Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and
they that are great exercise authority upon them. (Matt, xx, 25.)
In reality Pontius Pilate and Herod were “ the princes of the
Gentiles ” who exercised this dominion over the common people, and
Annas and Caiaphas, the chief priests, the captains of the temple
and the elders, were those who exercised authority over the common
people.
Christ was not condemned to death by the common people, but
was sent to His death at the hands of the Roman soldiers by the
chief priests and scribes of the hierarchy at Jerusalem—the nnsrepresentatives of the common people.
Christ Himself said:
Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of Man shall be betrayed unto the
chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn Him to death, ami
shall deliver Him to the Gentiles (the Roman soldiers) to mock, and to scourge,
and to crucify Him. (Matt, xx, 18-10.)
At the very time that this prophecy was made Christ entered
Jerusalem, and the common people met Him with great enthusiasm.
A very great multitude spread their garments in the w ay: others cut down
branches from the trees, and strewed them in the way. and the multitudes that
went before, and that followed, cried, saying. Hosanna to the son of David:
blessed is He that cometh in the name o f the L ord : Hosanna in the highest.
(Matt, xxi, 8-9.)
And it was with this enthusiastic following of the common people
behind him that—
.Jesus went into the Temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bousht
in the Temple, and overthrew the tables of the money changers * * * and
said unto them. It is written. My house shall be called the house of prayer, but
ye have made it a den of thieves. (Matt, xxi, 12-13.)
The “ den of thieves” was a part of the political machine of Je
rusalem.
And when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things that He
did, * * * they were sore displeased. (Matt, xxi, 15.) "
It was not the common people who condemned Christ, as the Sena
tor from Washington erroneously believes. It was “ the chief priests
and the elders ,” who “ were sore displeased,” who took counsel against
Jesus to put Him to death. (Matt, xxvii, 1.) It was “ the chief
priests arid elders'1 who were guilty of the unspeakable infamy of
'
’
bribing Judas Iscariot with 30 pieces of silver to betray Christ.
(Matt, xxvii, 3). It was “ the chief priests and the elders ” that per
suaded their strikers and hangers-on that they should prefer Barabbas and destroy Jesus. (Matt, xxvii, 20.)
Jesus was not accused by the common people; he was accused by
“ the chief priests and the elders .” (Matt, xxvii, 12.) It was “ the
chief priests and elders ” that seized Jesus in the garden and led Him
38735— 10856
7
to Annas and then to Caiaphas, the high priest, where the scribes and
the elders were assembled. (Matt, xxvi, 57.)
It was “ the high priest ” who charged Christ with blasphemy, and
it was the priests and the elders who declared Him guilty of blas
phemy and worthy of death. (Matt, xxvii, 65-66.)
It was “ the chief priests , the captains o f the tem ple , and the
elders ” who seized Christ in the garden and to whom He replied.
(Luke xxii, 52.)
It was t h e y w h o took Him and led Him and brought Him to the
high priest’s house. (Luke xxii, 52-54.) It was the chief priests
and scribes who stood and vehemently accused Him before Pilate and
Herod. (Luke xxiii, 10.)
Mr. President, the men who were responsible for the crucifixion of
Christ were Pilate, the political judge, the beneficiary of a despicable
standpat military patronage, and the machine politicians of the
hierarchy in Jerusalem, who had wormed themselves in authority,
and it was not the common people icho were responsible.
The common people heard H im gladly. The comm on people threw
their clothes and palm branches in the streets for Him to ride over,
and shouted hosannas, and when Pilate and Herod yielded to the
demand of the machine politicians of Jerusalem, of the reactionaries
and conservatives of Jerusalem, and turned Christ over to the sol
diers of Herod for crucifixion, the comm on people follow ed H im
with weeping and with sorrow. The Scripture says:
And there followed him a great company of people, and o f women, which also
bewailed and lamented Him. (Luke, xxiii, 27.)
And—
Jesus, turning unto them, said, “ Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me,
but weep for yourselves and for your children.” (Luke, xxiii, 28.)
If the people of Judea had had the power which had been delegated
to the machine politicians of Jerusalem they would not have per
mitted Christ to be crucified.
The Senator from Washington evidently thinks that Pilate was a
virtuous judge and that the common people of Jerusalem were a
howling mob. The fact is Pontius Pilate was a typical machine
politician from Rome, the beneficiary of imperial patronage, willing
to crucify Christ himself and write with his own hand a false epitaph
over the cross rather than risk the loss of his political job, and the mob
that led Pontius Pilate to this crime was not a mob of the common
people but was a mob of temple thieves led by “ the high priests,”
“ the captains of the temple,” “ the elders,” the beneficiaries of the
hierarchy of Jerusalem, who, being possessed of delegated power,
used it in defiance of the will of the masses of the common people of
Jerusalem.
Let us hear no more of the Pontius Pilate precedent. Even if it
had been true that the masses of the common people of Judea had
been as ignorant and as bloodthirsty as the standpat politicians of
Rome and of Jerusalem, who murdered Christ under the pretense of
law, still no parallel is justified to be drawn between people worthy
of this description and the common people of the United States of
America. Nineteen hundred years ago the common people could not
38735—1085G
read; nineteen hundred years ago the common people could not
write; nineteen hundred years ago the common people had no books,
no newspapers, no telegraph, no telephones, no transportation; nine
teen hundred years ago the common people had no opportunity to un
derstand the problems of government. In this day and generation
nearly every single one of the great mass of the common people can
read, can write, and has before him every morning the news of the
world for his information. The average citizen of the United States
to-day knows more than Herod and Pilate and Tiberius Caesar rolled
into one, and knows more than the chief priests, the captains of the
temple, and the scribes of that era. I believe in the rule of the peo
ple, and I invite the Senator from Washington and all those who
oppose the progressive movement to find a new argument and to
abandon the precedent of Pontius Pilate.
38735—10850
<v
SALE OF THE MINERAL DEPOSITS OF
THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW COAL
AND ASPHALT
LANDS
IN OKLAHOMA
“ I count myself as one of the custodians of the good name of the
Nation.
Every Senator on this floor is charged with the personal re
sponsibility of keeping the plighted faith of this Government, and no
argument based upon material advantage will avail to justify any policy
which will give ground to the Choctaws and Chickasaws to feel that the
United States has been guilty of perfidy and dishonor. These Choctaws
and Chickasaws are my constituents. They are citizens of the United
States and of Oklahoma. They are my friends, and I represent them on
this floor as Senator from the State of Oklahoma, and I serve notice on
the Senate that patience has ceased to be a virtue.”
SPEECH
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
O F
OKLAHOM A
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
APRIL 15, 1912
&
W A SH IN G T O N
1912
400S3— 1000G
I
SPEECH
OF
II ON . R O B E K T
L.
OWEN.
The Senate having under consideration the bill (S. 5727) to provide
for the appraisement of the mineral deposits of the segregated coal and
asphalt lands of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, and for other pur
poses—
Mr. OWEN said :
Mr. P resident : I rise to request and to demand that the
United States fulfill its treaty obligations to the Choctaw and
Chickasaws by the immediate sale of the coal and asphalt de
posits, as the United States is pledged to do by treaty.
Nineteen years ago the Dawes Commission was instructed to
negotiate with the Choctaws and Chickasaws for the allotment
of their lands, the giving up of their tribal governments, and
the creation of State government (27 Stats., G45, sec. 16). The
Dawes Commission was expressly authorized in this act—
To procure the cession, for such price and upon such terms as shall
he agreed upon, of any lands not found necessary to be so allotted or
divided, to the United States.
The Choctaws and Chickasaws were very reluctant to give
up their method of landholding, and to give up their tribal gov
ernments, to which they were deeply attached. The holding of
land in common was almost a religion with the Indian people.
But after four years of solicitation and urging the Choctaws and
Chickasaws, who had always been extremely friendly to the
United States and loyal to the wishes of the Government, agreed
to give up their tribal governments by an agreement of April
23. 1897 (U. S., 30 Stats., 495, sec. 29).
By this agreement the Choctaws and Chickasaws agreed to
relinquish their tribal government; that their lands should be
allotted; and the United States agreed on its part to fairly
divide the property owned by them in common at the expense
o f the United States.
This agreement was amended by a supplemental agreement
approved by Congress July 1, 1902 (32 Stats., 641).
By section 14 it was agreed that the residue of lands not
reserved or otherwise disposed of should be sold at public
auction under the rules and regulations prescribed by the Secre
tary of the Interior and the proceeds distributed per capita.
And it was further expressly provided as follows:
S e c . 56. A t th e ex p ir a tio n o f tw o y ea rs after the final ratification of
this agreement all d e p o s its o f coa l anil a sp h a lt which are in the lands
within the limits of any town site established under the Atoka agree
ment, or the act of Congress of May 31. 1000. or this agreement, and
w h ich a rc w ith in th e e x t e r io r lim its o f a n y lands r e s e r v e d _ fro m a llo t
m en t on a cco u n t o f th eir eoa l or a sp h a lt d e p o s its, as herein provided,
and w h ich a re n ot a t th e tim e o f th e final ra tifica tio n o f this a g r e e
m en t em b ra ced in a n y then ex is tin g coa l o r a sp h a lt lea se, sh all be sold
a t p u b lic a u ctio n for cash under the direction of the President as here
inafter provided, and the proceeds thereof disposed of as herein pro
vided respecting the proceeds of the sale of coal and asphalt lands.
S ec . 57. A ll coa l and a sp h a lt d ep osits which are within the limits of
any town site so established, which are at the date of the final ratifi
cation of this agreement covered by any existing lease, shall, a t th e
ex p ira tio n o f tw o y ea rs a fte r th e final ra tifica tion o f th is a g r eem en t, be
40083— 1000G
3
4
under the direction of the President as herein
after provided, and the proceeds thereof disposed of as provided in the
last preceding section. The coal or asphalt covered by each lease shall
be separately sold.
The purchaser shall take such coal or asphalt
deposits subject to the existing lease, and shall by the purchase succeed
to all the rights of the two tribes of every kind and character under
the lease, but all advanced royalties received by the tribe shall be
retained by them.
S e c . 58. W ithin six months after the final ratification of this agree
ment the Secretary of the Interior shall ascertain, so far as may be
practicable, what lands are principally valuable because of their de
posits of coal or asphalt, including therein all lands which at the time
of the final ratification of this agreement shall be covered by then
existing coal or asphalt leases, and within that time h e s h a ll , b y
so ld
a t p u b l ic a u c t io n
w r itte n
ord er, seg reg a te
and
reserve
fro m
a llo tm en t
a ll o f s a i d
la n d s .
S u c h s e g r e g a t i o n a n d r e s e r v a t i o n s h a ll c o n f o r m t o t h e s u b d i v i s i o n of
the Government survey as nearly as may be, and the total segregation
and reservation shall not exceed 500,000 a c r e s .
Mr. President, it lias been 10 years since this solemn promise
was made to the Choctaws and Chickasaws.
They have demanded from time to time the fulfillment of
this guaranty by the United States, and. as Senator from Okla
homa, I have strenuously and persistently urged the sale of
these coal and asphalt lands and deposits.
The Department of the Interior, which was charged with
carrying out the plighted honor of the United States, now finds
shelter for not carrying out this law under the act approved
April 26, 1906, section 13. which was passed at the instance
and with the approval of the department itself, as follows, to
w it :
That all coal and asphalt .lands, whether leased or unleased, shall
be reserved from sale under this act until the existing leases for coal
and asphalt lands shall have expired or until such time as may be
otherwise provided by law.
These lands amount to approximately 445,000 acres:
Acres.
Coal land, Choctaw Nation_________________________________________ 438, 000
Asphalt land, Choctaw Nation_____________________________________
1. 000
6, 000
Asphalt land, Chickasaw Nation___________________________________
Congress has just passed an act providing for the sale of
the surface of the segregated coal and asphalt lands, but no
action was taken by Congress to sell the mineral deposits of
the coal and asphalt.
The Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. L a F o l l e t t e ] , I am ad
vised, desires that the United States should buy this coal and
asphalt belonging to the Choctaws and Chickasaws, with a view
to the conservation o f these properties and the administration
o f these coal fields by the Government of the United States,
and he has heretofore been unwilling to carry out the pledge
o f the United States to sell these properties and distribute the
moneys to the Choctaws and Chickasaws, because he hoped
that the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United
States would agree to buy this property and handle it under
the governmental administration.
Mr. President, I believe in the conservation of coal and
asphalt, but I believe that this is a problem which primarily
involves the conservation of the national honor. The preserva
tion of the national integrity is more imiiortant than the Federal
purchase or control of coal owned by private persons. The
United States Government gave its pledge and its guaranty 10
years ago to nearly 30.000 human beings—the Choctaws and
Chickasaws—that if they would do certain things and give up
certain things, to which they were deeply attached, the United
40083— 10906
5
States would sell this coal and asphalt and distribute the money
to these people.
The Choctaws and Chickasaws have been waiting 15 years
for the fulfillment of this pledge. Nearly 5,000 of these people
have died disappointed and have been denied the written pledge
of this Government. Justice delayed is justice denied.
I count myself as one o f the custodians of the good name of
the Nation. Every Senator on this floor is charged with the
personal responsibility of keeping the plighted faith of this
Government, and no argument based upon material advantage
will avail to justify any policy which will give ground to the
Choctaws and Chickasaws to feel that the United States has
been guilty of perfidy and dishonor. These Choctaws and Chick
asaws are my constituents. They are citizens of the United
States and of the State of Oklahoma. They are my friends,
and I represent them on this floor as Senator from the State
of Oklahoma, and I serve notice on the Senate that patience
has ceased to be a virtue.
I demand a fulfillment o f the written pledge of this Govern
ment to the Choctaws and Chickasaws in good faith.
Nobody believes that the Government will buy this property,
and nobody believes that the Government will permit this prop
erty to pass into the hands of any great monopoly. The abuse
of monopoly can be prevented by selling it in tracts o f reason
able size, and the laws of Oklahoma will do the rest.
If the Government is not going to buy this coal and asphalt,
then let the Government immediately sell this land to the high
est bidder and fulfill faithfully and honestly the plighted faith
of this Nation.
I submit a memorandum prepared by the Department of
the Interior in relation to the Choctaw and Chickasaw coal and
asphalt lands:
M EM ORANDUM
P R E P A R E D B Y T H E D E P A R T M E N T OF T H E
R E L A T IO N TO T H E C H O C T A W
AN D C H IC K A S A W
IN T E R I O R
IN
COAL AN D A S P H A L T
LANDS.
“ Additional legislation is required before the coal lands in the
Choctaw Nation can he disposed of (all of the coal lands are
within the Choctaw Nation). The last act of Congress on the
subject was passed April 20, 1900 (34 Stat., 137), and provides
as follows:
“ That all coal and asphalt lands, whether leased or unleased, shall
be reserved from sale under this act until the existing leases for coal
and asphalt lands shall have expired or until such time as may be
otherwise provided by law.
“ The last agreement with the Choctaw and Chickasaws, em
braced in the act of Congress approved July 1. 1902 ( 32 Stat.,
041), provided that the coal and asphalt lands in the Choctaw
and Chickasaw Nations be segregated. This segregation took
place March 24, 1903, and embraced an area of approximately
445,000 acres. This area is divided up substantially as follows:
Acres.
Coal land. Choctaw Nation, approximately_______________________ 438, 000
Asphaltum land, Choctaw Nation, approxim ately-----------------------1, 000
Asphaltum laud, Chickasaw Natiou, approxim ately-------------------6, 000
T otal___________________________________________________________
4 4 5 ,0 0 0
“ Of this area about 100,000 acres were covered by live coal
leases in effect July 30. 1909, and the 0.000 acres of Chickasaw
asphaltum lands were also covered by leases at the same time.
40083—10900
The coal and asphaltum leases were made for a period of 30
years from their respective dates. The dates of these leases
range from July 3, 1899, to September 16. 1902, and therefore
they will expire by their own momentum from July 3. 1929, to
September 16, 1932. Said act of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat., 641),
which provided that no more mining leases should thereafter
be made was not ratified by the Indians until September 25,
1902, and was not operative until x-atified by the Indians. This
accounts for the fact that some leases bear dates as late as
September 16, 1902.
“ Said act also provided that the segregated coal and asphal
tum land should be sold within three years from its date at
public auction for cash, under the direction o f the President,
by a commission composed of three persons to be appointed by
the President. This commission was appointed, but no lands
were disposed of by it. Pending action of said commission,
Congress made a provision in the Indian appropriation act of
April 21. 1904 (33 Stat., 189), whereby the method of sale of
the coal lands was changed from sales at public auction to sales
under sealed bids. Much of the coal land was advertised for
sale in 1904 under sealed bids. These sealed bids were opened
at the department, but were rejected because the Secretary de
cided that the price offered for the coal lands was inadequate.
The bids on 362 tracts, aggregating 60,946 acres (no tract ex
ceeding 960 acres), aggregated $498,562. an average of $8.18
per aci’e. Such bids included not only the land itself but the
mineral therein.
“ Nothing has been done since 1904 looking toward the sale
of the coal lands, indeed nothing can be done without new
legislation, as will be seen from the act of April 26, 1906 ( 34
Stat., 137), quoted above.
“ There was a wide divergence of opinion on the value of
these coal lands. On account o f this. Congress on June 21,
1906 (34 Stat., 325), appropriated $50,000 for the purpose of
prospecting the coal lands and drilling holes at different points
to ascertain the value o f the coal deposits therein contained.
This $50,000 was expended by the Commissioner to the Five
Civilized Tribes under the personal and direct supervision of
Mining Agent William Cameron.
Mr. Cameron personally
conducted the prospecting, drilling, and examination of the
field. His prospecting has been of great value to the Govern
ment, and the $50,000 appropriated was well expended. Mr.
Cameron was assisted in his work by a representative of the
Geological Survey detailed by the department. The man from
the Geological Survey, who has had this matter under his per
sonal supervision, is Mr. A. W. Thompson; he, however, is not
now in the Government service.
“ Senate Document No. 390, Sixty-first Congress, second ses
sion, gives a full and complete report of the prospecting done in
the coal areas. This report, which is evidently a reliable docu
ment, shows among other things the following, to w it:
“ Mi-. Cameron considers the present value of the workable
coal, separate from the surface, at $12,3l6,000 (p. 21). Mr.
Cameron confines his calculation to coal veins lying 1,000 feet
or less in depth from the surface (p. 90), and in the main con
fines his estimates to coal layers 3 feet in thickness or more
(p. 90). He thinks that the segregated coal area contains
283,649 acres of good workable coal (p. 21). He estimates the
40083— 10006
7
total value of the coal at $12,319,000. as stated above, or at
about $44 per acre (p. 71), and thinks that the rest o f the
segregated area, containing approximately 155,000 acres, is
either barren of coal or that the coal lies too deep for any com
mercial value.
“ The Geological Survey, to which Mr. Cameron’s report was
submitted, using the same basis as that adopted by Mr. Cam
eron, to wit, coal lying in measures 1,000 feet and less in depth
and having a thickness of 3 feet or more, estimates that the
workable coal covers an area o f 217,382 acres (p. 90). More
over, the Geological Survey has used another basis of calcu
lation upon which it places the coal area at 371,6S9 acres, using
coal measures at a depth of 3,000 feet or less and veins of a
thickness as small as 14 inches.
“ I especially invite your attention to the four assumptions
made by the Geological Survey in valuing the coal deposits
exclusive of the surface. I quote their exact language, found
on page 90 of Senate Document No. 390:
“ In valuing these coal lands, four assumptions may be m ad e:
“ (1 ) That the coal be retained by the Indians and sold under lease
hold contracts, as at present. A t the present royalty rate this would
yield a total return of approximately $160,000,000, less the cost of
inspection and administration, and at the present rate of mining this
return would be recovered in 666 years.
“ (2) That they be retained by the Indians until sold by tracts or
otherwise on demand for immediate exploitation.
On this basis the
value has been assumed to be the same that it would be if these were
Government lands and being held by the Government, and the value
calculated in the same way as the value of the Government lands.
This gives a total value of $26,026,920.
“ (3 ) That they be thrown onto the market by tracts and bring what
they will. Their value can not be estimated in this case, but undoubt
edly it would average very low.
‘‘ (4 ) That they be sold in a single piece to the State or National Gov
ernment. If the National Government can obtain money at 3 per cent
they are worth to it from $5,000,000 to $6,600,000. If the State govern
ment can obtain money at 5 per cent they are worth to it $4,000,000 or
less. They are worth to either the State or National Government such
a sum as the estimated income will pay interest upon and create a sink
ing fund that will ultimately recoup the investment.
Since 1902 the
annual production of coal in the Choctaw Nation has been about
3,000,000 tons. A t 8 cents a ton this yields approximately $240,000 a
year. Two hundred thousand dollars may be taken as a safe net roy
alty income, leaving $40,000 to meet the expense of inspection, adminis
tration, and contingencies.
“ The leases above referred to have yielded, since the Govern
ment took charge, a royalty of 8 cents per ton, mine run, and
have produced the following tonnage and royalty:
Y ear e n d in g J u n e 30—
O u tp u t.
1903.............................................................................................................................
1904.............................................................................................................................
1905.............................................................................................................................
1906.............................................................................................................................
1907.............................................................................................................................
1908.............................................................................................................................
1909.............................................................................................................................
1,404,442
1,900,127
2,398,156
2,735.365
3.187,035
3,198 ,862
2,859,516
2,722 ,290
3,079.733
2,780,649
2,728,437
Tons.
R o y a lty .
$110,145.25
138,486.40
199,663.55
247.361.36
261,929.84
277,811.60
248.428.36
251,947.02
240,199.23
273,196.82
218,376.07
“ It is to be remarked that the most desirable coal measures
within this segregated area are under lease.”
40083— 10906
o
A
A
SUGGESTIONS FOR PLATFORM USE,
FOR THE OVERTHROW OF MACHINE RULE AND CORRUPTION IN GOVERNMENT
AND FOR THE CONTROL OF THE “ SPECIAL INTERESTS.”
[By R obert L. Owen .]
We have the honor to present suggestions which we trust may
be useful to those charged with the duty of drawing Democratic
platforms.
We the representatives of the Democratic party o f ---------, in con
vention assembled, declare the following principles:
We emphasize again the declaration of our Democratic national
platform of 1908:
u The conscience of the nation is now aroused and will free the
Government from the grip of those who have made it a business asset
of the favor-seeking corporations. It must become again a people’s
government, and be administered in all departments according to
the Jeffersonian maxim, £equal rights to all, special privileges to
none.’
’ is the overwhelming issue which
manifests itself in all the questions now under discussion.”
That such is the primary issue has become perfectly clear. Only
A
vhere there is a properly framed system of direct primaries and other
up-to-date governmental mechanism do the people rule or can the
people rule.
During the past two years the gross abuses of power by the Repub
lican national and state organizations, usually termed the “ machine,”
have emphasized the fact that you, the people, do not rule. The
Payne-Aldrich tariff law
and there is no pretense that it has done so. It
has not lowered in the least the cost of living.
but multiply, and with insolent power have seized
every American market place. The monopolists are rapidly acquir
ing all the wealth produced by the people and reducing millions of
the weaker citizens to abject poverty.
all
“ ‘ Shall the people rule?
from the trusts,
not controlled,
has not removed the tariff shelter
M onopolies are
The physical property
of the interstate railroads is still w ithout valuation,
5 0 5 1 8 -0 3 0 3
2
of which demonstrates the completeness with which these and other
special-privilege corporations are in power.
Back of this rule of privilege is the coercion of impoverished em
ployees and the secret and corrupt use of millions of dollars of cam
paign funds for the nomination and election of the Republican regu
lars. The Republican congressional committee has refused to publish
the names of its campaign contributors, while the Democratic con
gressional committee and the Democratic national committee both did
so, and before the election. This attitude of the committees and the
subsequent continuation of legal privileges by the Republican ma
chine is conclusive proof of its corrupt alliance with the special inter
ests; and this proof is supplemented by the continued refusal of the
Republican machine to establish a system whereby there shall be
publicity of campaign funds before the election. The Democratic
Representatives in Congress continue to stand for the people’s-rule
system. The National Democracy declared it the chief national issue;
and thus the underlying issue continues to be, Shall you, the people,
reestablish a system of government in which you will rule? Shall
you cast off your masters and become self-governing men?
Your immediate master in government is the Republican machine,
financed by the holders of privilege and owned by them.
So long as machine-rule system of government is permitted to con
tinue the sinister alliance will exist.
You can not control the trusts by the Government
when the Government is controlled by the trusts.
The indecent and injurious alliance between the trusts and the Gov
ernment has been denounced openly by the most prominent Repub
licans in Congress—by Senator Dolliver, of Iowa; by Senator La
Follette, of Wisconsin; by Congressman Norris, of Nebraska, and
others—and recognized by many leading Republicans who are utterly
disgusted with the rule of corrupt privilege.
But the Aldrich-Cannon machine insists that the people do rule;
that they rule through the Republican machine organization. The
organization is glorified by Cannon and Aldrich.
If the people rule, why don’t the people get what they
want?
Why has there been no reduction of the tariff?
Why has there been no reciprocity, but a law authorizing retalia
tion instead?
Why has there been no effective control of monopoly ?
Why has there been no lowering of prices on the necessaries of
life?
Why no genuine control of railroad freight and passenger rates?
5 0 5 1 8 -9 3 0 3
3
Why no control of railway discriminations between cities?
Why no control of overcapitalization of stocks and bonds of rail
ways and of industrial monopolies?
Why no physical valuation of railways as a basis of fair rates as
urged for years b your Interstate Commerce Commission?
}^
Why does the United States Senate block the election of Senators
by direct vote of the people?
Why should one man control the Senate and one man control the
House of Representatives?
Why should there be machine rule at all?
Why no control of the telegraph and telephone monopolies?
Why no control of the express companies?
Why no parcels post?
Why no progressive inheritance tax on gigantic estates, which all
civilized countries except ours enjoy?
Why no control of the gigantic gambling in stocks and bonds and
in agricultural products?
Why no development of national good roads?
Why no development of our national waterways system ?
Why no national law for publicity for campaign funds before elec
tions and a sound corrupt-practices act?
by are the publications of fraternal orders, of educational so
cieties, and the magazines denied reasonable rights and threatened
with higher rates? They are talking too much of the evil of machine
rule.
Why no department of labor?
Why no department of education?
Why no department of health ?
Why are the labor unions and farmer unions classed as conspiracies
in restraint of trade and their prayers denied?
What does forty-five thousand millions of corporate wealth, listed
by Moody, mean, with 10,000,000 sweat-shop workers and desper
ately poor struggling for bare maintenance? What does a thousand
million dollars in one man’s hands mean, when white women are
bought and sold like cattle because of helpless poverty ?
The reason is plain: Gigantic fortunes built on mo
nopoly, protected from com petition abroad, are absorb
ing the national wealth and are in alliance with the Re
publican machine, to which they secretly contribute
m illions of money, to be repaid in the legislation and
im munity which the machine controls.
The industrial monopolies oppose a lower tariff and lower prices,
and in vain the people petition the political machine for relief.
5 0 5 1 8 -9 3 0 3
The railroad monopolists oppose lower and fairer freight rates,
physical valuation, control of capitalization, and control of specu
lation in stocks and bonds, so the people appeal to the machine in
vain.
The express companies oppose a parcels post, so the people are
denied relief by the machine.
The railroad monopolists do not want improved waterways, fear
ing competition, nor improved public roads, and the machine takes
no interest in the people’s wishes.
The big interests oppose a progressive inheritance tax and an in
come tax, so, after much talk, the machine gives no substantial relief.
Publicity for campaign contributions before elections and a thor
ough going corrupt-practices act would ruin the alliance, so there is
no action.
The whole system of government has become one of special favor
itism and special privilege, and members of the machine openly
barter with each other for them.
The United States Senate opposes the direct election of Senators
because the people, voting directly, would overthrow the machine
and machine-made Senators.
The honest Republican citizen and voter is as badly injured and
oppressed by the operations of the machine as other citizens and
worse, because his confiding belief in the integrity of his party’s
leaders is betrayed.
The denial of the great essentials the people want is all the proof
the people need that the machine rules and that the people do not.
The question is, Will the people throw off the rule of special privi
lege and become self-governing men in fact as well as in theory?
Do not the great holders of legitim ate wealth realize
that the overthrow of corrupt governm ent is essential
to the stability of society and the safety of their for
tunes? W ill they wait for a revolution?
In behalf of the Democratic party o f ---------we pledge to you, the
entire people of the State, that the Democratic nominees for the legis
lature will each be invited to make to you the following pledge in
writing:
T o the people o f t h e --------- district , State o f ---------- :
I pledge to you that if you elect me to represent you in the legisla
ture I will vigorously work and vote for the needed mechanism
whereby you can actually exercise your sovereignty. To that end I
will stand for the passage of the following laws in their most thor
oughgoing and perfected form:
First. An honest registration law and a really secret ballot.
5 0 5 1 8 -9 3 0 3
5
Second. A thoroughgoing direct-primary system covering local,
state, and congressional offices, direct election of delegates to national
party conventions, direct election of party committeemen, and a means
whereby the voters in each party can directly instruct delegates (as
in Texas).
Third. A vigorous corrupt-practices act, with limitation of the use
of money by candidates and all others to the absolute necessities of the
campaign, with publicity of such funds immediately before the nomi
nating primaries and before the elections, with publicity pamphlets
setting forth the argument for and against men and measures, deliv
ered to each voter free by the secretary of state before the nominating
primaries and before the elections.
Fourth. An authorization to the people to install the Des Moines
plan of municipal government, a notable success, already adopted in
a large number of cities during the last two years.
Fifth. An improved form of the Illinois public-opinion law,
whereby the people can vote directly on public questions, the will of
the majority becoming an instruction to legislative representatives—
national, state, and local.
Sixth. And especially will I stand for the initiative and the refer
endum, by which the people can initiate laws they do want if the
legislature fails to act, and can veto laws they do not want if the
legislature should enact obnoxious laws.
Seventh. The right of recall, by which any state or municipal offi
cial can be retired if he proves to be dishonest or inefficient.
Eighth. A law establishing in the voters at the primaries and at
the elections a right to indicate a second choice and a third choice,
thereby resulting in majority nominations and majority elections and
enabling the progressives to get together without fusion. [See S.
Doc. 603, 61st Cong., 2d sess.]
Thus the Democratic nominees will be made an agency whereby the
needed laws shall be installed and do away forever with successful
political corruption in this country.
When you, the people, vote for Democratic nominees who are
pledged to this platform you will in reality vote for yourselves, for
your own power, the actual establishment of your own sovereignty,
and for the overthrow of the corrupt political machine that has seized
the powers of government and is subjecting you to the unendurable
pilfering of its commercial allies.
When the proposed system of party government is established you
can secure whatever other reforms are needed.
5 0 5 1 8 -9 3 0 3
6
T H E R EFOR M ER .
[Benton Bradley, in La Follette’s.]
Does it make you mad when you read about
Some poor, starved devil who flickered out
Because he had never a decent chance
In the tangled meshes of circumstance?
If it makes you burn like the (ires of siu.
Brother, you’ re fit for the ranks— fall i n !
Does it make you rage when you come to learn
Of a clean-souled woman who could not earn
Enough to live, and who fought, but fell
In the cruel struggle and went to hell?
Does it make you seethe with anger w ithin?
Brother, we welcome you— come, fall in !
Whoever has blood that will flood his face
A t the sight of the beast in the holy p la ce ;
Whoever has rage for the tyrant’s might,
For the powers that prey in the day and n ig h t;
Whoever has hate for the ravening brute
That strips the tree of its goodly f r u it ;
Whoever knows wrath at the sight of pain,
Of needless sorrow and heedless gain ;
Whoever knows bitterness, shame, and gall
A t the thought of the trampled ones doomed to fall.
He is a brother in blood, we know ;
W ith brain afire and with heart aglow,
By the light in his eyes we sense our kin—
Brother, you battle w ith us— fall i n !
5 0 5 1 8 -9 3 0 3
PEOPLE’S RULE VERSUS BOSS RULE
This Republic was not founded on any so-called “ representative
principle.”
The Representative is merely a convenience, a servant, an
agency subject of right to the direct control of the people.
This Republic was founded on the principle that the people were
sovereign and had a right, if they pleased, to manage their business
directly, a God-given right, vested in them, inalienable and indefeasible,
and directly to alter, amend, or abolish any law. Every State constitu
tion declares and exemplifies this fundamental principle. Every State
constitution, except one, was established by the direct law-making power
of the people.
The option to use the initiative and referendum is not in conflict
with the present convenient system of legislating through representa
tives, but is in harmony with that system and makes it more repre
sentative, not less representative.
REMARKS
OF
OF O K L A H O M A
IN THE
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
MARCH
3 , 1913
W A SH IN G T O N
GO VER N M EN T PR IN TIN G O FFICE
1913
REMARKS
O
P
HON.
EOBEET
L.
OWEN.
On Senate resolution 413. declaring that such a system of direct legis
lation as the initiative and referendum would establish is in conflict
with the representative principle upon which this Republic was estab
lished.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, the greatest duty o f government
is to make effective the primary principle of the Declaration
o f Independence; to secure to the people, and to all the people,
the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
This inalienable right with which the people were “ endowed
by the Creator ” has been purloined from millions to the benefit
of the few through a series o f political, commercial, and finan
cial monopolies slowly built up during the last 75 years.
This system has diverted the proceeds o f the labor of millions
to the coffers o f the few, until in spite of the wonderful modern
inventions of this age, which pours out a stupendous flood of
material things which men desire, we see a thousand millions
o f dollars of wealth in the hands o f a single man and millions
of human beings, willing and anxious to do honest labor, with
out the certainty of food and shelter to-morrow.
The unrestricted right to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness is thus denied millions, and the duty o f the Govern
ment to make effective the fundamental doctrine of the Republic
as yet remains unperformed.
I deem it my duty to call the attention of the United States
Senate and the attention of the country to the cause and the
remedy of this serious condition. I make no complaint of a
class, emphatically no complaint of a rich class, nor do I com
plain o f the past. I am exclusively concerned with the imme
diate future welfare of men," women, and children.
THE
CAU SE.
The cause is this: Hie people's-rule party Government under
Jefferson has been in past years (from 1844 to 1908) steadily,
if not stealthily undermined and replaced by the machine-rule
party government. In place of the people’s rule the machine
rule," financed and engineered by special interests, has placed in
power on a vast scale in legislative, administrative, and judicial
positions machine-rule representatives—in municipalities. States,
and Nation. The rule of the few was thus established. The
people have .voted, but they have not really ruled.
The rule o f the few, consciously or unconsciously, has been
too largely for the benefit of the few at the expense of the
many.
The few have established all-pervading commercial and finan
cial monopolies; destroyed all competitive markets in selling
and buying; limited production on a giant scale, and deliberately
9
84132— 11872
3
ns n policy, thus limitin'; the employment of labor; manufac
tured watered stocks and bonds by billions of value, on which
the people have been compelled to pay interest; squeezed and
expanded the credit market, damaging millions, that a few
might absorb values; and have compelled the laboring millions
to compete under harsh conditions with each other, until mil
lions of women and children have been driven from the Amer
ican home into the labor market, and millions of children as
well as women and men have been denied the reasonable oppor
tunities of “ life, liberty, and the pursuit o f happiness.”
Machine-made representatives in legislative, executive, and
judicial position have granted and protected privilege to the few
at the expense of the many until we are face to face with the
most tremendous extremes of wealth and poverty the world has
ever known.
The cause has been machine-rule party government in collu
sion with corrupt commercial and financial allies governing for
the benefit of the few at the expense of the many, at the expense
of all of the people, at the expense of the real producers of
wealth.
There are two very different kinds of “ representatives ” in
the governing business. The machine-rule party government
representatives who take the point o f view favorable to privi
lege and to the few, and the people’s-rule party government
representatives who take the point of view favorable to equal
rights to all, favorable to the great mass of men who labor as
artisans, workers in shop, field, forest, and mine, as professional
men or in transportation or in other human activities.
I do not trouble myself to question the motives of men; I am
concerned with the effect of the actions of men.
TH E
EEM ED T.
The remedy is to restore people’s-rule party government and,
provide a mechanism by which the intelligence and patriotism
of the mass of men can control party government and can con
trol the actual direct government by people’s-rule representa
tives in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the
government.
The statutes necessary to this end are—
First. A thoroughgoing honest registration act.
Second. A thoroughgoing direct mandatory primary act.
Third. Honest election laws and machinery.
Fourth. A thoroughgoing corrupt-practices prevention act.
Fifth. The initiative, referendum, and recall; and the most
important of all these acts is the initiative and referendum,
which is the oi>en door to all other reforms.
Above all the initiative and referendum offers the line of least
resistance in obtaining reform for the reason that no candidate
before the people dares refuse the people the right of the initia
tive and referendum where the demand is vigorously insisted on.
In its entire history the Senate has never had a more impor
tant question before it. It is the duty of the Senate to throw
the weight of its influence on the right side.
And I feel entirely justified in calling the attention of the
Senate and of the country to the urgent, vital importance of this
issue and to defend it against the unjust assaults of its enemies.
Whatever I may say in regard to the matter must be re
garded as entirely impersonal, as I fully concede the right of
841 3 2 — 1 1 8 7 -
others to differ with me and shall carefully abstain from at
tributing: to other Senators any unpatriotic motive in promoting
their political philosophy, however mischievous and disastrous
I may think the effects of such doctrines would be if they should
be adopted.
Mr. President, on January 2, 1912, a then Senator from Texas
[Mr. Bailey] delivered an address of three hours in the Senate
in an attempt to show th a t,“ such a system o f direct legisla
tion ” as “ the initiative and referendum ” would establish would
be in conllict with “ the representative principle ” on which he
alleged “ this Republic was founded.”
This speech, on February 4, 1913 (C ongressional R ecord,
p. 25G9), was offered to be printed as a Senate document.
In order to make this deliberate assault on the principles of
popular government the then Senator raised a moot question
by submitting and speaking to the following resolution:
Senate resolution 413.
Resolved, That such a system of direct legislation as the initiative
and referendum would establish is in conflict with the representative
principle on which this Republic was founded and would, if adopted,
inevitably work a radical change in the character and structure of our
Government.
No action was requested on this resolution. It is obvious
that this speech, offered to be printed as a Senate document,
was intended to be used as a campaign document by those who
oppose popular governmeut and the initiative and referendum,
which is the open door to real popular government. This op
position to popular government has recently prepared numerous
speeches which have been printed as Senate documents for the
campaign against the people’s rule, some of which I shall men
tion. For example:
1. An address delivered by Mr. Lodge (Senator from Massa
chusetts) at Raleigh, N. C., November 28, 1911, on “ The Con
stitution and its makers,” and presented to the United States
Senate by a Senator from North Carolina [Mr. O verman ], with
the request that it be printed as a Senate document. (S. Doc.
No. 122.)
2. An address delivered by Hon. E lihu R oot at the annual
meeting of the New York Bar Association in New York City
on January 19, 1912, entitled “ Judicial decisions and public
feeling,” presented by a Senator from Utah [Mr. Sutherland],
with the request that it be printed as a Senate document, Janu
ary 2, 1912. (S. Doc. No. 271.)
3. An address delivered by Mr. Nicholas Murray Butler, presi
dent of the Columbia University, late Republican vice presi
dential candidate before electoral college, before the Commercial
Club of St. Louis, November 27, 1911, entitled “ Why should we
change our form of government,” presented by a Senator from
Utah [Mr. Sutherland] on January 3, 1912, with the request
that it be printed as a Senate document. (S. Doc. No. 238.)
4. An address delivered by Hon. Samuel W. McCall, a Mem
ber o f Congress from Massachusetts, before the Ohio State Bar
Association, on July 12,1911, entitled “ Representative as against
direct government,” presented by a Senator from Michigan [Mr.
S m ith ] to the United States Senate, with the request that it be
printed as a Senate document, January 23, 1912. (S. Doc. No.
273.)
5.
An address delivered by Hon. Emmett O'Neal, governor of
Alabama, at the one hundred and forty-third annual banquet of
the Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York at the
Waldorf, November 16, 1911, entitled “ Representative govern
ment and the common law—A study of the initiative and refer
endum,” presented to the Senate by a Senator from Texas [Mr.
Bailey], with the request that it be printed as a Senate docu
ment, January 3, 1912. (S. Doc. No. 246.)
G An address by President Taft to the general court of the
.
Legislature of Massachusetts, at Boston. Mass.. March IS, 1912.
against giving the people direct power, presented to the United
States Senate by a Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Gal linger] with a request that it be printed as a Senate document,
March 22. 3912. (S. Doc. No. 451.)
7.
An address by Mr. Wendell Phillips Stafford (an Associate
Justice o f the Supreme Court o f the District of Columbia),
before the New York County Lawyers’ Association, February 17,
1912, entitled “ The new despotism,” referring to the despotism
of a majority of the citizens in the several States and in the
United States over the minority, presented by a Senator from
Utah [Mr. Sutherland] to the United States Senate, with the
request that it be printed as a Senate document. (S. Doc.
No. 344.)
S. An address delivered in the United States Senate by a
Senator from Utah [Mr. Sutherland]. July 11. 1911. entitled
“ Government by ballot,” denouncing the initiative, referendum,
and recall (the principles of the constitution of Utah). (Senate
document room.)
9. An address by lion. William H. Taft (President o f the
United States) at Toledo, Ohio, on March S, 1912. entitled
“ The judiciary and progress,” opposing the recall and the ex
tension of popular government, presented to the United States
Senate by a Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Oliver], with the
request that it be printed as a Senate document, March 13, 1912.
(S. Doc. No. 40S.)
10. An address by Hon. H enry Cabot Lodge fa United States
Senator from Massachusetts), delivered at Princeton Univer
sity, March S, 1912, entitled “ The compulsory initiative and
referendum and the recall of judges,” presented to the United
States Senate by a Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Gallinger], with the request that it be printed as a Senate docu
ment. (S. Doc. No. 406.)
11. An address by a Senator from Texas [Mr. Bailey] op
posing the initiative and referendum and the recall, delivered
January 2, 1913.
The glaring error of these various arguments against the
principles of popular government I caused to be answered by
one of the clearest thinkers and most patriotic men in the
United States, C. F. Taylor, Esq., editor of Equity, Philadel
phia. (S. Doc. No. 651, May S. 1912.)
But these speeches against the principles of popular govern
ment are not the only ones printed as Senate documents and
in the Congressional R ecord. The Congressional R ecord,
Sixty-second Congress, first session, volume 47, page 3738, con
tains an argument against the initiative, referendum, and re
call, by Clinton W. Howard, introduced into the R ecord by a
Senator from Washington [Mr. Jones].
84132— 11872
6
Hon. H enry C abot L odge, a Senator from Massachusetts,
delivered a speech before the Central Labor Union o f Boston,
opposing the right of the people of Massachusetts to express
their opinion on any public policy, which was such a valuable
contribution to political literature that it was printed as a
Senate document. (S. Doc. No. 114, Sixtieth Congress, first ses
sion. )
Hon. James A. Tawney delivered a speech before the Minnesota
Bankers’ Association, June 21, 1911, opposing the initiative,
referendum, and recall, which was so highly approved by Hon.
J oseph G. Cannon, formerly Speaker of the House of Repre
sentatives, that he had it put in the Congressional R ecord
the first session of this Congress. (C ongressional R ecord, vol.
47, p. 4231.)
And the Hon. George W. Wickersham, Attorney General of
the United States, delivered a speech at Syracuse,* N. Y., re
peated it at Cleveland, and repeated it again at Princeton. N. J.,
and which was also printed in this Congress as a Senate
document. (S. Doc. No. 20.)
Hon. George W. Wickersham, Attorney General o f the United
States, delivered another argument against the initiative, refer
endum, and recall before the law school of Yale, which was
printed in this Congress as a Senate document. (S. Doc. No.
0 2 .)
They are, with only two exceptions, the arguments of leading
standpat Republicans o f the most reactionary type. It is the
point o f view of the federalist as opposed to the democratic
point o f view. (See Federalist Letter No. 10.)
I need not mention other speeches in opposition. These are
sufficient to show who opposes, and to make it easy to ascer
tain what their point of view is. However worded, the argu
ment of all these gentlemen proceeds from a common basis—a
distrust of the people, a lack o f confidence in the capacity o f the
people for self-government.
The then Senator from Texas complained in the beginning of
his remarks o f the “ unparalleled zea l” of those who favor the
initiative and referendum, and suggested that “.the men who
are opposed to the initiative and referendum have made no spe
cial effort to combat them.” The various speeches above re
ferred to against popular government shows an extensive propa
ganda against popular government being carried on by the
leaders of the Republican Party of the extreme type.
President Taft six years ago traveled 1,G00 miles to make a
set speech against the initiative and referendum at Oklahoma
City, advising the people of Oklahoma against this “ cumber
some and illogical legislative method ” contained in their pro
posed constitution, pointing out the dangers that would ensue
from such “ hasty, irrational, and immoderate ” legislation, and
so forth.
The people o f Oklahoma having considered well the views of
Mr. Taft voted in favor o f the initiative and referendum by
307,000 majority, substantially only the Republican officeholders
and the voters they could influence being against it.
It is an interesting matter to observe that the then Senator
from Texas,' in his crusade against the initiative and refer
endum, is found in close working sympathy with the Republican
statesmen above referred to, the followers of Alexander Ilarnil81132— 11872
7
ton and bis theory of the wisdom of the rule of the few and
of the folly of the rule of the common people (Senator L odge,
Senator L oot, Senator S u t h e r l a n d , President Taft, James A.
Tawney, J o seph G. C a n n o n , Representative M cC a l l , Nicholas
Murray Butler, W. P. Stafford, C. W. Howard, Attorney General
Wickersham, Senator O liver , Senator G allinger , Senator
J ones , Senator S m it h of Michigan). The then Senator ex
plained that he had been called a “ reactionary.” It is his argu
ments, his public utterances, and his company in the assault
on the initiative and referendum and on popular government
that have doubtless contributed to fix this public estimate of the
Senator.
THE
W E IG H T
OF POPU LAR O PIN IO N FAVORS T H E IN IT IA T IV E
ENDUM W H E REVER IT H A S BEEN D ISC U SSE D .
AND
REFER
I call attention to the fact that the State lately represented
by the then Senator—Texas—has just returned his successor—
Mr. M orris S heppard — who was overwhelmingly elected by the
people of Texas over the opposition of the recent Senator after
Mr. S heppard had made a campaign defending popular govern
ment and the initiative, the referendum, and the recall. So that
the people o f Texas have thus approved the principles of the
initiative and referendum, advocated by their present Senator,
and have not been persuaded to the contrary by the eloquence of
his predecessor.
Not only have the people of Texas thus approved the advo
cate of the initiative and referendum [Mr. S h e p p ar d ], but the
great adjacent Commonwealths of Oklahoma. Arkansas, and Mis
souri have placed the initiative and referendum in their consti
tutions. The vote in Mississippi in 1912 was two to one in favor
of the initiative and referendum, but failed o f adoption because
of the antiquated provision requiring a majority o f all votes
cast in the election; and the advisory vote in Illinois was over
three to one, but a machine jack-pot legislature trampled upon
the direct mandate of the people. The States of Washington,
Oregon, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Montana, South
Dakota, Colorado, Nebraska, and even the far eastern State of
Maine, Arkansas, Missouri, and Idaho and the central State of
Ohio, have adopted the initiative and referendum in their consti
tutions, and many other States are on the point of adopting the
initiative and referendum, so that we may speedily expect the
adoption in at least 14 additional States of the initiative and
referendum which President Taft denounced six years ago when
Oklahoma was beginning this great fight for restoring popular
government. When I entered the Senate only Oregon had the
initiative and referendum in good working order, two other
States—Montana and South Dakota—then having adopted it in
a weak form. It has become a nation-wide issue among the
States, and we find ourselves even in the United States Senate
face to face with numerous Senate documents containing many
addresses delivered against the principles of direct popular gov
ernment by various Republican leaders— Senator L odge, at
Raleigh; Senator R o o t ; Nicholas Murray Butler; Congressman
M c C a l l ; Senator S u t h e r l a n d ; President Taft before the Mas
sachusetts Legislature; President Taft at Toledo: Justice Staf
ford, of the District of Columbia, in New York City; Attorney
General Wickersham; James A. Tawney; Senator L odge at
Princeton.
84132— 11872
8
This great progressive movement for perfecting popular gov
ernment has seized upon the heart of the natioual Democracy
which has chosen as the next President a man who thoroughly
understands this issue and has thrown himself with enthusiasm
into the leadership of it.
Ninety per cent o f the Democratic Tarty membership is
thoroughly progressive. Ten per cent of the members, perhaps,
may not clearly understand the issue, or some may be still
blinded or misled by private interests, and some may be in
fluenced unconsciously by their attachment to the old game of
machine polities, which is now staggering to its final fall on
American soil. Shallow epithet or thoughtless denunciation
will no longer serve to meet the grave issues presented in this
country for the complete reestablishment o f popular self-gov
ernment.
W H Y T H U P EO PL E NEED T H E
IN IT IA T IV E AND T H E
REFERENDU M .
The people need the initiative to pass the laws they do want
and need and which the legislature (especially a machinecontrolled legislature) for any reason fails to pass, and they
need the referendum so as to have the power o f veto over
crooked and corrupt or undesired laws which might be passed by
the legislature (especially a machine-controlled legislature).
Why is it that they do not get the laws they want, and why
is it that they get the laws they do not want?
M A C H IN E
P O L IT IC S
OR R O SS
RU LE .
*
The answer to this is known to every student of our public
law'. It is due to the evil results of machine politics, which,
in its worst form, begins with a crooked precinct organization,
controls nominations and ballot boxes and election machinery,
and has contrived to bring about a gross and corrupt miscarriage
o f our “ representative democracy,” w'herein nominations are
fraudulently extracted from prearranged conventions, wherein
State officers are nominated by State conventions composed of
machine politicians thrice refined through the State convention,
the county convention, and the precinct convention or caucus.
Machine party rule is organization, once honorable and legiti
mate, which has fallen into the hands o f machine men, where
the principle of good government is not the controlling force
but where selfish private ambition or private gain controls.
Under this system, if a governor is to be nominated by one
or the other o f the two lending parties (the process has largely
been the same in either party when the corrupt machine is once
established), the following method is pursued: The State chair
man calls for delegates to a State convention, assigning each
county so many delegates. Thereupon the county chairman calls
for a county convention, consisting of delegates, assigning to
each precinct one or more delegates, whereupon, the precinct
committeeman (who when the machine actually exists is a petty
precinct boss, a cog in the machine) calls a precinct convention
or caucus to select the delegate or delegates to the county con
vention. Such a precinct boss will call the precinct caucus on
short notice, obscure advertisement, at an inconvenient time
and place, possibly over a saloon, and will pack this little
precinct caucus with his own henchmen and friends by ex
traordinary diligence. He will have prepared on a slip of
paper the delegates he wants elected. lie will call the meetiug
to order perhaps 1 0 minutes before the time set, his watch being
81132— 11872
9
a little fast, lie will ask if there are any nominations, and one
of liis henchmen will nominate the boss himself, perhaps, or
some equally trusted gentleman of the machine, and they will
vote instantly. It will be carried by acclamation and the meet
ing will adjourn sine die, and ilicn and there the governing
power departs from the “ dear people,” never to return. The
oOO votes in the precinct have then and there had their govern
ing power purloined and stolen by the machine. The American
eagle has fallen into the trap of the machine and is safely
tied down. The county convention—when under machine man
agement— consists of such high-minded patriots, self-selected,
who will nominate the most select of their own class to represent
the citizenship of that county in the State convention, and the
State convention, consisting of these self-selected rulers by this
highly refining process, will dispose o f the nominations of all
important State offices, governors, attorneys general, supreme
court judges, legislators, and so forth and nominate “ hand
picked ” delegates to nominate a presidential candidate in
national convention.
In this State convention these self-selected rulers write the
party platform which binds the State legislature and the State
officials o f all classes, from the governor down. The govern
ing business has thus been transferred through the machineorganized precinct from the body of the good citizens, who are
unorganized and unobservant, and who possibly may not sus
pect fraud, into the hands of a band o f organized mercenaries.
A national convention based on fraud at the precinct is one
degree worse than a State convention. These self-selected
rulers who have thus by the crafty process o f machine politics
succeeded in framing State conventions, county conventions, dis
trict conventions, etc., and national conventions, and in nomi
nating the officials of the State and Nation and in laying down
the party platform, which means the rule of government, hav
ing nominated their chosen friends for various positions, pro
ceed to elect them by processes even more criminal. To start
with, they stuff the registration lists with dead men and ghosts.
They put down the names of men who do not exist and have
their henchmen arrange strikers to represent these artificial
voters. In Oklahoma City recently there were large numbers
of such false registrations reported. In New York City at one
time they discovered over 30,000 of such false registrations.
In Philadelphia, I am advised, there were disclosed over 70,000
at one time, and only the Lord o f Truth knows how many they
really have had in this Nation. These organized scamps get
charge of the election machinery, they name the State election
board, and the county election boards, the city and county
precinct election officials; they have control o f the ballot boxes
and of the ballots; they bribe or coerce weak voters; some
times they stuff the boxes; and sometimes, where public opin
ion will not stand for this, they content themselves by voting
thousands of falsely registered names; they arrange that a
machine tool may vote five times in a precinct under five dif
ferent names, and then repeat his vote as many times under
other names in each o f 10 other precincts. Such a useful
voter—called a repeater—deserves to be rewarded with public
employment and usually is rewarded by being given some
political preferment in a small way, sometimes merely by being
paid so much money for his services and by an occasional job.
84132— 11872
The machine may control the police, and at the ballot boxes
they can see to it that no interference with their plans is per
mitted. They also control sometimes the judges of the courts,
who will accord “ a fair hearing” to any scamp that belongs
to the machine and shield him from lawful pudishment. There
are found sufficient technical reasons why these scoundrels
never get inside of the jails. It is not enough to stuff the
ballot boxes in this w a y ; these officers of election can also
deface and count out the ballots of citizens who are “ against
the machine.” They can, under their rules o f management,
throw out a precinct or a whole county where the better ele
ment prevails for fictitious reasons, deliberately devised by
this system o f organized rascality. So that, even where an
honest majority might, in spite of all pitfalls, be found, the
machine, through the process of thus fraudulently nominating
and fraudulently electing candidates, can overthrow the ma
jority and retain possession of the governing business. Patri
otic men have discovered these evil elements to be in control
of the governing powers of the States in greater or lesser degree,
and that the machine and its agents and representatives have
become the allies and the agents o f organized greed and cor
rupt selfishness, until in some States and cities the whole sys
tem of government has become so despicable that the best citi
zens of the State, in despair, absent themselves from the polls
and take little or no interest in public affairs, on the ground
that politics is a “ dirty business.” Honest citizens justly com
plain of the corrupt alliance between the political party ma
chine— often bipartisan, as in New York, Illinois, and Pennsyl
vania—and the corrupt corporations, which deliberately en
gaged in swindling the people out of vast property rights by
granting privileges and properties that belong to the people
without fair consideration. What is even worse, this evil sys
tem has not only given the people no relief against the organ
ized monopoly that has slowly absorbed nearly all of the oppor
tunities of life and are oppressing the people beyond reason in
a mad race for wealth accumulation, but has tremendously con
tributed to the establishment of monopoly by legislative favor
and by executive immunity. Congress itself has exemplified
this system and until recently had not given relief which the
people had a right to ask, although the political parties had
been promising the people relief for years.
Those who have opposed enlarging the direct power of the
people, led by President Taft, loudly proclaimed in the cam
paign of 1908, in answer to the Democratic demand for the
“ people’s rule,” that the people did rule through the Republican
Party, and that those who claimed that the people were not rul
ing were merely agitators and demagogues.
The great progressive party o f the country, the Democratic
Party, raised this issue of direct legislation and declared in
favor of it in the national platform o f 1900. They demanded
the direct election of Senators: they demanded the publicity of
campaign contributions: they demanded an end to corrupt prac
tices; and they demanded "th e i>eople's ru le” in terms most
emphatic in the platform o f 1908, denouncing the graft and po
litical corruption traced to the representatives of predatory
wealth, the debauchery of elections, and declaring “ the rule of
the people” to be “ the overwhelming issue.”
84132— 11872
11
The people realized in 1900, when the Republican Party lead
ers passed the Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act, that the Republican
leaders did not represent the people but represented privilege
and private interests. It was obvious from their conduct that
the people did not really rule the country, but that organized
plutocracy was in control. In an address to the Senate before
the campaign of 1910 on the 28th day of May, 1910, I called the
attention of the country to the fact that the people did not really
rule in Congress; that the people had been promised many
things for years by the party in power and had been continually
disappointed. I pointed out then many things which the people
justly desired and had prayed for in vain.
That they had urgently desired—
The control o f monopoly.
Lower prices on the necessaries of life and on manufactured
goods.
Lower railroad rates. Lower passenger rates.
Physical valuation of railroads and of telegraph and tele
phone and industrial corporations.
Reciprocity with other nations.
An act preventing corrupt practices in governmental proc
esses.
A sweeping control of improper campaign contributions.
An end o f gambling in agricultural products, cotton, and
foodstuffs.
The abatement of the gigantic stock and bond gambling estab
lishment in Wall Street.
An end to overcapitalization o f stocks and bonds.
An end to unfair railway discriminations.
The development of good roads.
The legitimate development of national waterways.
An income tax.
A progressive inheritance tax.
An employers’ liability act.
An act providing adequate workmen's compensation.
A minimum wage for women.
An eight-hour labor day.
Fair treatment for child labor.
Fair prices for their crude products.
The right both to buy and to sell on a competitive market.
All these things the people had sought and had not received
because they did not really rule through the Republican Party.
B E L IE F
IS
ABOUT TO COME T H R O U n il T H E
PARTY.
PRO G R ESSIVE DEM O CRATIC
The demand for the people's rule became the battle cry of the
Democracy in 190S, and in 1910 the people captured the House
of Representatives through the Democratic Party and immedi
ately undertook the fulfillment o f these promises for a better
government by overthrowing Cannonism and by passing numer
ous acts reducing the tariff, all vetoed by Mr. Taft.
The Democratic Party made good in 1911 and 1912, and in the
campaign of 1912 they took further advanced ground toward
purifying the processes of government and establishing the rule
of the people in the following magnificent declaration:
Wo direct attention to the fa ct that the Dem ocratic T arty’s demand
fo r a return t o t h e r u l e o f t h e p e o p l e , e x p r e s s e d in t h e n a t i o n a l p l a t
form four p e a r s a y o , has now become the accepted doctrine o f a large
84132—11872
m ajority o f the electors. We again remind the country that only by a
larger exercise of the reserved power of the people can they protect
themselves from the misuse o f delegated power and the usurpation of
governmental instrum entality by special interests. For this reason
the national convention insisted on the overthrow o f Cannonism and the
inauguration o f a sys:em by which United States Senators could be
elected by direct vote. The Democratic Party offers itself to the country
as an agency through which the complete overthrow and extirpation of
corruption, fraud, and machine rule in American politics can be effected.
They went further: they provided for a preferential ballot for
presidential candidates in 1916 by a primary and for election
likewise o f members of the Democratic national committee, who
should immediately take their places and put an end to the
machine management o f the Democratic national committee in
the following language:
We direct that the national committee incorporate in the call fo r the
next nom inating convention a requirement that all expressions of prefer
ence fo r presidential candidates shall be given and the selection o f
delegates and alternates made through a primary election conducted by
the party organization in each State where such expression and election
arc not provided for by State law. Committeemen who are hereafter
to constitute the membership o f the Dem ocratic national committee and
whose election is not provided for by law shall be chosen in each State
at such primary elections, and the service and authority o f the com
mitteemen, however chosen, shall begin immediately upon the receipt
o f their credentials, respectively.
They did more. They pledged an end to abuse of money in
elections by publicity and by limiting individual contributions in
the following plank :
We pledge the Dem ocratic P arty to the enactment o f a law prohibit
ing any corporation from contributing to a campaign fund and any
individual from contributing any amount above a reasonable maximum.
They went further to break up machine rule by proposing to
put an end to the abuse of patronage by a President in renomi
nating himself in the following plank:
We favor a single presidential term, and to that end urge the adoption
o f an amendment to the Constitution making the President o f the
United States ineligible for rceiection, and we pledge the candidate
o f this convention to this principle.
They declared for the control by the people of the United
States Senate by the direct election o f Senators.
The Democratic Congress of 11*10 and 1912 was a Congress of
magnificent accomplishment, overthrowing Cannonism. passing
acts to lower taxes, providing the direct election of Senators,
admitting progressive Arizona and giving New Mexico an
amendable constitution, limiting the election expenses o f Sen
ators and Representatives, passing a hill to prevent the abuse of
injunction, passing a bill giving an eight-hour day for workmen,
and so forth.
The Democratic Party in its platform of 1912 promised the
people the relief which they have all these years hoped for—
tariff reform, control o f the trusts, lowering the cost of living,
physical valuation of railroads, express companies, telegraph
and telephone lines, proper banking legislation, development of
waterways and roads, declaring in favor o f conserving the propery of the people, the protection o f the rights o f labor, to estab
lish a Department o f Labor, to establish an independent public
health service, to establish the parcel post (now the law ), and
to reform the administration o f the civil and criminal law.
The tremendous effect of the souud, honest, wise Democratic
doctrine has been felt in the Senate itself, whose character and
84132—11872
13
point of view on next week—March 4, 1913—will be far removed
from the point of view of the Aldrich regime of six years ago.
Mr. President, the people are going to rule through the pro
gressive Democratic Party, which has pledged itself as an
agency through which they can really enforce the matured
public opinion of the country.
The progressive policies of the Democratic Party mean the
absolute overthrow of the political machine, and I rejoice in
the declaration of the noble platform that—•
The Dem ocratic P arty offers itself to the country as an agency
through which the complete overthrow and extirpation o f corruption,
fraud, and machine rule in American politics can be effected.
And 1 remind my fellow Senators that the initiative and the
referendum and the recall comprise the quickest, most direct,
adequate available means by which to put an end to corrupt
machine politics in the Nation and to overthrow the baleful in
fluence o f the machine.
The ideals of the machine are low. The notion of the ma
chine politician is to get a job at governmental expense for him
self and his cronies; perhaps to make money out of the govern
ing business by selling privileges to those who wish to buy at
the expense of the people—it may be the selling o f municipal
contracts; it may be selling franchises; it may be selling im
munity from the law intended to control vice and criminal
conduct; it may be the blackmailing o f legitimate business
through a jack-pot legislature, or the withholding, until paid
for, the statutes required by the people. There are numerous
degrees of the machine, from the comparatively harmless to that
which is utterly corrupt and criminal.
There are many perfectly honest men, however, who stand by
a party organization as a matter o f party loyalty, not realizing
when legitimate organization becomes illegitimate organization;
when honest party organization becomes a dishonest organiza
tion unworthy the support o f good men, when their party man
agement falls into the hands of a selfish or corrupt machine.
This mischief-breeding system has grown from the convention
system, as established in 1832, which developed into the danger
ous machine-rule system in 1844, against which Benton and Cal
houn made their great protests. They forecasted what has hap
pened, and we are now trying to undo the harm which was then
begun, and which in recent years has reached such an evil emi
nence. It is against the bad practices and evil results of ma
chine government that thoughtful citizens have determined to
promote the initiative and referendum. In 1902, by the vigorous
questioning of candidates by nonpartisan organizations, a wedge
was forced into the iron-clad panoply o f the two great political
parties, in both of which the machine existed in greater or
less degree, and in this way an opening was made for the
establishment of the greatest of all of the agencies for enforcing
“ representative democracy.” We had the form of a repre
sentative democracy—we did not have its substance for the
reason that in many cases the representatives in State legis
latures and in Congress and in executive and judicial offices,
owing their elections to the machine, and the political machine
having a good working agreement with the corrupt commercial
and financial interests, prevented the representatives of the
people really representing the people and had them in fact
84132— 11872
14
representing the special interests as against the general in
terest.
The people need the initiative and referendum as the quickest
means by which they can conveniently overthrow the corrupt
political machines in the United States. By the initiative the
people can pass any law they do want, and by the referendum
they can veto any law they do not want, and this is a deadly
peril to the machine and to the “ representative ” who is really
a representative of corrupt special interests, while it is a shield
and buckler to the "representative” who really at heart repre
sents the people. A good representative is glad to have any bill
which he passes referred to the people, and he is glad to have
the people initiate any bill which they really desire.
W hat is
the
I nitiative
T IIE
and
R efeuendum?
IN IT IA T IV E .
In its ordinary meaning it is this: The initiative means the
right of the people, under forms prescribed by law. to initiate
any law they want and to whch they can get a sufficient num
ber of thousands of citizens to attach their signatures on peti
tions, to be submitted by the secretary of state at the next regu
lar election to the voters of the State for their adoption or re
jection. It is very troublesome to get up an initiated petition.
It is expensive. It is only done by those who are moved by a
powerful interest and who believe that their proposal would
meet the approval of the majority of the citizens of the State.
The initiative permits a certain number of thousands of voters
to make a motion before all o f the citizens of the State, which
shall be voted on, just as one man in a mass meeting can make a
motion and have it voted on. or as one member of a legislative
assembly can make a motion that a certain bill which he drafts
shall be voted on. But the initiative by the people before it
can be moved must have thousands of people say that they want
it voted on by signing a petition to that effect. It takes over
18,000 voters in Oklahoma to initiate a bill. It gives the peo
ple an opportunity to pass any law they do want in this way
when their legislature for any reason—particularly for the
reason that the legislature is controlled by a crooked bipartisan
political machine— refuses to pass laws which are of funda
mental importance, such as a tliorougbgoiug corrupt practices
prevention act. Oregon could never get a corrupt practices
prevention act that was efficient until Oregon had the initiative
and referendum, because the organized rascality of that State
was iu control o f the legislature and would not permit it to
be done. They could not get a proper direct primary nor other
needed statutes.
T IIE
REFEREND U M .
It is merely this: That the people, within 00 days after an
objectionable act is passed, may in like manner sign a petition
by a certain number of thousands of voters requesting that the
particular objectionable act passed by the legislature which the
petitioners believe injurious to the people shall be suspended in
its operation until the next regular election, at which time the
people shall have the right either to contirm or reject such
statute so passed by the legislature. Usually S per cent of the
voters can initiate a bill they want, and 5 per cent of the voters
can have a referendum. A better system would be to require a
tixed number o f qualified voters, as 10,000. or 15,000, or 20.000,
841:52— 11872
15
as in Maine. This fixes a definite standard and more clearly
visualizes to the public the size and dignity of the demand for
a proposed measure before it can be submitted to the whole
people.
T H E I N IT IA T IV E AND T H E REFERENDU M AND T H E M A C H IN E .
The initiative and referendum, as I have said, is a deadly
enemy to the machine. The machine can only retain its power
power by preventing the passage of a corrupt practices prevention act, by preventing honest election laws, and preventing the
establishing of honest election machinery. The organized ras
cality of the machine will always be found in the way of a
thorough-going corrupt practices prevention act and will always
be found opposed to perfecting the election machinery.
This is why in New York the bipartisan machine, led by ma
chine politicians on the Democratic side, and by machine poli
ticians on the Republican side, defeated a primary law. This
is why proper laws controlling corrupt practices and perfecting
the election machinery so as to make it absolutely honest have
not been passed in New York, in Pennsylvania, and in numerous
other States, and this is why the people of California adopted
the initiative and referendum and the recall; this is why Oregon
adopted i t ; this is why Oklahoma adopted it, and this is why so
large a number of States have adopted the initiative and refer
endum, and why so many others are about to adopt it, and this
is the reason why it is going to be adopted in every single one
of the 48 States of this Union.
And no amount of political sophistry is going to stop the
American people from adopting the means by progressive meas
ures for putting an end to organized misconduct in the govern
ing business in the United States.
The American people know what the trouble is, and the great
English ambassador, James Bryce, in the American Common
wealth, photographed it for their information under the head
ings “ The machine,” “ Rings and bosses,” “ Spoils, etc.,” in
1888. (American Commonwealth, Vol. II, pp. 51-141, ed. 18S8.)
Public opinion has not been hasty, but has moved slowly, very
slowly, too slowly.
Why, Mr. President, even the control of corrupt practices in
the nomination and election of the President of the United States
and in electing Senators and Members o f Congress has never
been properly passed. The law on the publicity of campaign
contributions, the law which we have passed, is grossly defec
tive, requiring no publicity of certain individual contributions, no
publicity of any committee spending money wholesale on national
elections, except where that committee is confessedly in charge
of two or more States, and there is no machinery for making
effective publicity of campaign contributions. The reason is
that the power of the machine has been so great in the House
and in the Senate that the perfecting of this law has appeared
to be impossible. The American people are going to end it by
putting their hands on the governing business with power and
with direct authority through the initiative, the referendum, and
the recall. These statutes open the door for the passage ol
corrupt practices prevention acts and for the recalling o f un
fa ithful representat i ves.
By the initiative and referendum we can pass the Australian
ballot, which being a secret ballot prevents the financial ana
84132-—11872
commercial bullies of tbe country coercing the suffrage o f the
poor citizens whose bread and butter these bullies control.
By the initiative and referendum we can pass a mandatory
primary law in spite of the legislature controlled by the ma
chine, and in this way can permit the citizens to nominate their
proposed representatives and take the nomination of public
officials out of the hands of the convention system, out of the
machine, out of the hands of organized rascality.
By the initiative and referendum we can pass a thorough
going corrupt practices prevention act that will destroy machine
politics and corrupt practices in this Republic, and will drive
out of public life machine-picked candidates, who are the allies
and often the agents of monopoly and of the corrupt commercial
and financial interests, who have not hesitated to use money on
a gigantic scale. We have had in recent years overwhelming
evidence of this.
By the initiative and referendum a new era o f pure and up
right government will be introduced into the United States
and into the States o f the Union in which the welfare of men,
of women, and poor children will be the great motive force of
law making and o f law executing, and an end will be put to
the use of legislative and executive power for the purpose of
promoting merely the financial and commercial power of organ
ized greed.
By the initiative and referendum we can promote organized
righteousness in government and overthrow organized corruption.
By the initiative and referendum we can overthrow the cor
rupt convention system and establish the rule of the intelligence
and conscience of the majority of our citizens.
By the initiative and referendum we can overthrow organized
selfishness and establish organized altruism.
By the initiative and referendum we can overthrow the liquor
traffic in the United States and establish sobriety and temper
ance and providence in this Republic.
By the initiative and referendum we can overthrow the Patent
Medicine Trust and establish a department o f health that will
save hundreds of thousands of citizens annually from prevent
able diseases and death.
By the initiative and referendum we can establish the riehts
of the weak, o f poor feeble men, o f women, and of children
who can not stand up against the grinding conditions established
in this Republic and brought about by the combination of
machine politics and organized corrupt selfishness.
It is no wonder that 4,000,000 voters broke away from all
party ties and followed Theodore Roosevelt when he threw him
self at the head of this vital demand for righteousness and effi
ciency in government. It is no wonder that Woodrow Wilson,
having for years questioned the practicability o f the initiative
and referendum, changed his mind about it and threw himself
on the right side of this vital question and is now a great ex
ponent o f this doctrine and the head of a party which thoroughly
believes in it.
This noble doctrine of the democracy has won over millions
of good citizens heretofore affiliated with other parties and led
directly to the organization of the Progressive Party, so called.
The Democratic Party has long been the more progressive
party of the Nation, even if it has had its efficiency impaired by
84132— 11872
IT
corrupt machine politics in some of the States. It has been
demanding the direct election of Senators for many years. It
lias violently opposed the corrupt use o f money and the coercion
of voters by commercial and financial interests, and has been
opposing the trusts for many, many years. The Democratic
Party declared itself boldly and strongly in favor of “ d irec t
leg isla tio n ” in its platform of 1900 in the following language:
W e favor direct legislation wherever practicable.
This means the initiative and referendum. And in its great
platform of 1908 was the following noble declaration of pro
gressive principles:
We rejoice at the increasing signs of an awakening throughout the
country.
The various investigations have traced graft and political
corruption to the representatives of predatorg wealth, and laid bare
the unscrupulous methods by which they have debauched elections and
preyed upon a defenseless public through the subservient officials whom
they have raised to place and power.
The conscience of the Nation is note aroused and w ill free the Govern
ment from the grip of those who have made it a business asset of the
favor-seeking corporations. It must become again a people’s Govern
ment, and be administered in all departments according to the Jeffer
sonian maxim— “ equal rights to a l l ; special privileges to none.”
“ (Shall the people rule? ” is the overwhelming issue which manifests
itself in all the questions now under discussion.
The people can only rule by having the right o f direct legis
lation which they may exercise at their option. They do not
wish to exercise this right except in important cases. They
prefer their representatives to make, judge, and execute the
law. It is only when their representatives fail to represent
the people that the people would care to exercise direct power.
By arranging that the people may exercise direct power at their
option, the representatives would make it unnecessary for the
people to exercise this power, because the big stick of public
opinion, being available through the initiative and referendum
and recall, the legislator, the judge, the administrative officer
will represent matured public opinion to the best o f his lim
ited understanding, and generally in a satisfactory manner.
Our President elect, Woodrow Wilson, although at one time
regarding the initiative and referendum as unnecessary and
unsuitable, came to change his mind substantially about it for
the same reason that other thoughtful men changed their
minds, and are daily changing their minds, on this great ques
tion; and that is, for the reason that you can not get the eco
nomic and humane reforms desired for the welfare of the race
until you overthrow the machine and establish righteous and
responsive government by giving the people a mechanism
through which the public conscience and public intelligence can
act. On August 26,1911, in the Outlook, Gov. Wilson said:
For 15 years I taught my classes that the initiative and referendum
wouldn’t work. I car. prove it n o w ; but the trouble is they do. * * *
Back of all other reform s lies the means of getting it.
Back of the
question, W hat do we W ant? is the question. How are we going to get
it ? The immediate thing we have got to do is to resume popular gov
ernment.
* *
* We are cleaning house, and in order to clean house
the one thing we need is a good broom. The initiative and referendum
are good brooms.
And Theodore Roosevelt, before the Ohio constitutional con
vention on April 21, 1912, said:
I believe in the initiative and referendum, which should he used not
to destroy representative government, but to correct it whenever it
becomes misrepresentative.
84132— 11S72-------2
United States Senator
has said:
R obert M . L a F o l l e t t e ,
of Wisconsin,
In my judgment the public interests would be promoted if a majority
of the voters possessed the option of directing bv ballot the action of
their representatives on any important issue, under proper regulations,
insuring full discussion and mature consideration upon such issue by
the voters prior to balloting thereon.
United States Senator
J o n a t h a n B o u r n e , o f Oregon, has said:
The initiative and referendum is the keystone of the arch of popular
government, for by means of this the people may accomplish suen other
reforms as they desire. The initiative develops the electorate, because
it encourages study of principles and policies of government and affords
the originator of new ideas in government an opportunity to secure
popular judgment upon his measures. The referendum prevents misuse
of the power temporarily centralized in the legislature.
United States Senator
1911, said:
H
I
i
!
I
M o ses E . C l a p p ,
in San Francisco in
The initiative and referendum I regard as more than monitorial. If
the American people are going to make a success of free government,
they have got to take an interest in government. These measures are
a thousand times more valuable as an educational and inspirational
force, great as their monitorial value may be. They open an avenue to
the voter, so that he does not have to ask any political boss permission
to air his views.
Gov. John F. Sliafroth, about to enter the Senate as the Sen
ator from Colorado, said:
The initiative and referendum places the Government nearer to the
people, and that has always been the aim of the framers of all repub
lican forms of government.
Gov. Hiram W. Johnson, of California, the recent candidate
for Vice President of the United States, and who received over
4,000,000 votes, said in his inaugural address before the Cali
fornia Legislature:
I commend to you the proposition that after all the initiative and
referendum depend upon our confidence in the people and their ability
to govern. The opponents o f direct legislation and the reeall, however
they may phrase their opposition, in reality believe the people can not
he trusted. * * * W e who espouse these measures do so because of
our deep-rooted belief * * * not only in the right o f the people to
govern hut in their ability to govern.
Judge Beu B. Lindsay, of Denver, recently said in the Toledo
News-Bee:
It is hard for me to understand how anyone familiar with the
methods of the great privileged interests of the country in controlling
courts and legislatures could fail to he an enthusiastic supporter of
the initiative and referendum.
Frof. Franklin IT. Giddings. of Columbia University, in an
address before the City Club of Philadelphia on March 23, 1912,
said:
I believe that the people of the United States are changing their form
of government somewhat by introducing such new measures as the
referendum, the initiative, the recall, and the direct primary, in part
because their interests have become largely new, in part because o f
real restiveness under existing conditions, but in part also because, to
au extent never before seen in our history, the people are now thinking
about things, whereas during a great part of our political history they
have thought not about things but only about candidates.
And Dr. Chariot A. Beard, associate professor of politics in
Columbia University, said:
*
*
* anxiety for the preservation of representative institutions
need not lead anyone into the extreme view that the initiative and
referendum are incompatible with them.
They do not destroy repre
sentative government, neither is there any indication, nor anything in
the nature of things, showing that they can destroy such government.
84132— 11872
Switzerland has this system in excellent working order, an<3
many of our American States have adopted it for the reasons
which I have brielly suggested.
AN
A N S W E R TO T H E
ARGUM ENT
IN
FAVOR OF
S E N A T E R E S O L U T I O N 41 3 .
Mr. President, I shall now directly answer the proposals of
Senate resolution 413, that the initiative and referendum as
established or proposed in the American States is in conflict with
the representative principle on which this Republic was founded
and would work a radical change in the character of our Gov
ernment.
The argument made by the then Senator from Texas on this
point is that the language used by certain “ representative ”
citizens in the Constitutional Convention of 17S7 would argue
that they thought the Government of the United States was
intended to be “ a representative democracy ” and not a mon
archy, an aristocracy, or a “ pure democracy.”
Conceding that these gentlemen made the illuminating remarks
attributed to them, after all, what they said is immaterial and
irrelevant.
The remarks of Charles Pinckney, or Madison, or Hamilton,
or o f Fisher Ames, or of Ellsworth, or of Pendleton, in secret
convention or elsewhere, are unimportant in the presence of
the actual history and constitutions of the 4S States, even if any
accidental phrase or opinion emanating from any of these excel
lent gentlemen had relevancy, which they have not.
Some of these men suggested the importance of people in
thickly settled communities delegating to representatives their
governing powers as a matter of necessary convenience, and the
wisdom of this observation novman disputes. Some of them
pointed out that a “ pure democracy ” was not practicable or
wise in a country such as ours, and to this proposal no advo
cate of the optional initiative and referendum, which is the
only form proposed in America, takes issue.
Mr. L odge has the precaution upon further study of this
question to discuss the “ computsorp initiative and referendum ”
(at Princton, March 8. 1912), which is not an issue in the Uuited
States, and he thereby practically concedes that he has no
adequate argument against the optional “ initiative and refer
endum,” the only form suggested in this country.
The compulsory initiative and referendum would mean that
the people would be compelled to pass on every law, which is
not suggested by anyone as suitable in a Republic of 90,000.000
people. Mr. L o dge ’ s escape through the "compulsory d o o r” is
ludicrous and a humorous side light on his estimate of the igno
rance of his Princeton audience.
Even if Madison and Pinckney and Hamilton had known
what the modern initiative and referendum is and had opposed
it in specific terms, their opinions would be of no importance.
We might as well go back to 1787, a hundred and twenty-five
years, and have them tell us how to devise a telegraph system,
or to invent a telephone system, or to send messages 3.000 miles
through the air without wires, or to run railway trains at 00
miles the hour, or to construct a Mauretania for the high seas.
These innocent old gentlemen would fall dead with astonish
ment if they could see the conditions of modern life. They are
not qualified to instruct us in statecraft.
81132— 11872
The then Senator from Texas makes a crafty appeal to the
sense of reverence which all men have for their ancestors, and
then tries to argue that our ancestors were opposed to the
initiative and referendum. The answer to all this is that our
ancestors did not have the slightest idea what the modern op
tional initiative and referendum is; in the second place, our
ancestors expressed no opposition to the modern optional initia
tive and referendum; and, in the third place, our ancestors had
no conception of how a representative democracy could fall into
the control o f organized greed through the use of a political
machine. They never considered the possibility o f such a thing,
and if they were to have the present facts before them they
would probably support unanimously the initiative and referen
dum in order to perfect the representative system.
These ancestral statesmen, who met together in the seclusion
o f closed doors to discuss the framing of a Federal Constitution,
were men as a rule of strongly reactionary sentiment. Twothirds of them were quite thoroughly undemocratic; such lead
ing Democrats as Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Patrick
Henry, et al., were conspicuous by their absence. The debates
were behind closed doors, in secret conclave, no member allowed
to report or copy any of its proceedings, which were kept pro
foundly a secret for 00 years, until all the actors were dead.
No wonder this profound secrecy was demanded and observed,
for the G members of this convention were not authorized to
O
draft a constitution, but merely to propose amendments to the
Articles o f Confederation, and in drafting the Constitution they
were guilty o f usurpation of political power.
The undemocratic character o f the men who got into this
constitutional convention is demonstrated by numerous secret
speeches made by them when in that convention, and which they
believed would never be known by the people.
Elbridge Gerry, for example, declared—
that democracy was the worst of all political evils.
vol. 5, p. 537.)
(E lliott's Debates,
Edmund Randolph observed, in tracing the political evils of
this country to their origin, “ that every man (in convention)
had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”
Hamilton urged a permanent Senate “ to check the impru
dence of democracy.”
Madison thought the Constitution “ ought to secure the per
manent interests of the country against innovation.” (Elliott's
Debates, vol. 1, p. 450.)
And Madison, in the Federalist, warned the people against
“ the superior force o f an interested and overbearing majority.”
And these distinguished gentlemen from whom the then Sen
ator from Texas quotes with such gusto made a Constitution
practically tinamendable by the people. and failed to put into
the Constitution a bill of rights and the fundamental principles
of liberty contained in the Declaration o f Independence.
James Allen Smith, professor of political science, University
of Washington, well says:
From all evidence that we have, the conclusion Is irresistible that
they sought to establish a form of government which would effectually
curb and restrain democracy. They engrafted upon the Constitution so
much of the features of popular government as was, in their opinion,
sufficient to insure its adoption.
S4132— 11872
j ip —
And James Bryce makes a similar comment on their work.
In speaking of checks and balances devised in the Federal
Constitution Mr. Bryce says:
Those who invented this machinery of checks and balances were
anxious not so much to develop public opinion as to resist and build
up brick walls against it.
* *
* " The prevalent conception of pop
ular opinion was that it was aggressive, revolutionary, unreasoning,
passionate, futile, and a breeder of mob violence.”
(American Com
monwealth, Morris ed., 1906, p. 260.)
The convention of July 4. 1770, and the Declaration of Inde
pendence was thoroughly democratic. The Constitution of the
United States, drawn by the reactionaries 11 years afterwards,
was thoroughly undemocratic in numerous particulars, to some
of which I shall call attention.
There were only 65 members of this secret convention; only
55 members attended and only 39 members signed it, and they
were nearly all reactionaries.
The Constitution they submitted was undemocratic in the fol
lowing particulars:
First. The Constitution permitted a life President.
Second. The Constitution did not provide for the nomination
or election of the President by the people, but by electors far
removed from the people.
Third. The Constitution did not provide for the nomination
or election of Senators by the people.
Fourth. The Constitution provided for an uncontrolled judi
ciary (by possible interpretation), in striking contrast to the
laws of every State in the Union, including Utah.
Fifth. A minority of the House (34 per cent) can prevent the
majority proposing an amendment to the Constitution. A
minority of the Senate (34 per cent) can prevent the majority
proposing an amendment to the Constitution. A President can
prevent a majority of both Houses proposing an amendment to
the Constitution. A small minority of the States (20 per cent)’
can prevent the amendment of the Constitution.
Sixth. No provision for the adoption of the Constitution was
arranged by popular vote.
And some of the delegates who approved the Constitution from
Virginia at least disobeyed the instructions of the people.
Seventh. The Constitutional Convention usurped the power in
framing the Constitution.
They were only authorized to prepare amendments to the
Articles of Confederation, not frame a new Constitution.
Eighth. The Constitution did not protect the right of free
speech.
Ninth. The Constitution did not protect the right of free
religion.
Tenth. It did not protect the freedom of the press.
Eleventh. It did not protect the right of the people to peace
ably assemble.
Twelfth. It did not protect the right of the people to petition
the Government for the righting of grievances.
Thirteenth. It did not protect the right of the States to have
troops.
Fourteenth. It did not protect the right of the people to keep
and bear arms.
Fifteenth. It did not protect the people against the quartering
of soldiers upon them without their consent.
84132— 11872
22
Sixteenth. It did not protect the right of the people to be
secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against un
reasonable searches and seizures nor against warrants, except
upon suitable safeguards.
Seventeenth. It did not protect the people against being held
for crime, except on indictment.
Eighteenth. It did not protect the people against a second
trial for the same offense.
Nineteenth. It did not protect an accused against being com
pelled to be a witness against himself.
Twentieth. It did not protect the citizen against being de
prived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
Twenty-first. It did not protect private property being taken
for public use without just compensation.
Twenty-second. It did not secure, in criminal prosecutions,
the right of a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury in
the place where the crime was committed.
Twenty-third. It did not protect the accused in the right to
be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, of the
right to be confronted with the witnesses against him, of the
right to have compulsory processes in obtaining witnesses in his
favor, and to have the assistance of counsel in his defense.
Twenty-fourth. It did not protect the right o f the citizen in
common-law suits to a trial by jury.
Twenty-fifth. It did not protect the citizen against excessive
bail, against excessive fines, nor against cruel and unusual
punishments.
Twenty-sixth. It did not safeguard the rights reserved by the
people against invasion by the Federal Government.
Twenty-seventh. The Constitution is undemocratic in making
no provision for its subsequent amendment by direct popular
vote, although this was the method of the various States.
The ratification o f this undemocratic Constitution was only
obtained with the greatest difficulty, and in ho States was it
submitted to the people themselves for a direct vote.
Massachusetts, South Carolina, New Hampshire, Virginia,
and New York demanded amendments; North Carolina and
Ithode Island at first rejected the Constitution, and except for
the agreement to adopt the first 10 amendments and make it
more democratic, it would have assuredly failed.
George Washington, as president o f the convention, was de
barred from sharing in the debates. The Constitution had one
very great merit, it established the Union; it had one very
great demerit, it was grossly undemocratic. But it was not as
undemocratic as some modern statesmen would make it appear.
For instance, it did not formally prevent the recall of judges,
but provided that judges should hold office “ during good be
havior,” and placed the entire executive power in the hands of
a President, and the legislative power in the hands o f Congress,
both o f whom, in my judgment, have the power o f removing any
Federal judge upon the ground o f a high crime and misde
meanor or for any bad behavior and without impeachment.
It was not so undemocratic as to deny the right of direct
taxation of private citizens by an income tax, although the
Supreme Court o f the United States so misinterpreted the Con
stitution.
84132— 11872
23
The Constitution says:
No capitation ay other direct tax shall be laid, unless in proportion
to the census or enumeration hereinbefore directed to be taken.
The enumeration referred to is as follow s:
Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the
several States which may be included within this Union according to
their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the
whole number free persons, including those bound to service for a term
of years, and excluding Indians, not taxed, three-fifths of all persons.
The actual enumeration shall be made within three years after the
first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and then every sub
sequent term of 10 vears in such manner as they shall by law direct.
The inhibition of a direct tax by the clause above referred to
relates alone to a direct tax on a sovereign &tatc.
I have heretofore fully shown this by its history, by the Con
stitutional Convention debates, and by the other parts of the
Constitution and its interpretation by all departments ef Gov
ernment.
I f this clause of the Constitution were written out in full, it
would read:
No capitation tax against a sovereign State or other direct tax against
a sovereign State shall be laid unless in proportion to the census or
enumeration of the population of such States hereinbefore directed to
be taken.
The Supreme Court of the United States, misled by fallacious
arguments, interpreted this clause so as to make it read:
No capitation tax against a sovereign State or other direct tax
against a private citizen shall be laid unless in proportion to the census
or enumeration of the population of the States hereinbefore directed to
be taken.
And on this interpretation held that an income tax, being a
direct tax on a citizen, was inhibited by this clause of the'Con
stitution.
Such an interpretation of above clause o f the Constitution is
incongruous and absurd. It is incongruous to interpret the
clause to jump from a State to the citizen as its subject. It is
absurd to say the clause intended to forbid a direct tax on a
private citizen unless in proportion to the census. The United
States has always directly taxed its citizens and does so now,
so that this interpretation by the Supreme Court is in direct
conflict with the historical and as yet unbroken interpretation
of the Constitution. The Constitution of the United States,
while undemocratic, was not as undemocratic as this.
We do not need to be advised by the undemocratic Alexander
Hamilton, nor by the undemocratic members in this secret con
clave of 1787, as to the true principles of democracy. These
principles are abundantly set forth in the Declaration of Inde
pendence and in the constitutions of the 48 States, and show
beyond the peradventure of a doubt that the people of the vari
ous States intended to preserve their liberties by retaining in
their own hands the sovereign powers of government, and this
is abundantly shown by the plain words of the Declaration of
Independence and of the constitutions of the 48 States.
The then Senator from Texas lays great stress upon the
opinions o f several of the reactionaries in the secret conclave
of 1787, in which 39 “ unauthorized ” delegates, selected by the
legislatures before a constitutional convention was suggested,
framed a constitution that still ties the hands and interferes
84132— 11872
w ith the liberty o f 90,000,000 o f human beings to freely govern
themselves.
Tn point o f fact there were about 3,000,000 people in America
at that time outside o f the secret conclave at Philadelphia,
where certain “ representatives” were embezzling power “ for
the good o f the people.”
These 3,000,000 people outside o f the little Constitutional Con
vention at Philadelphia had some very sound opinions on human
liberty and on freedom. These w ere the people who fought the
w ar with Great Britain and established their independence and
w ho proposed to keep it by not setting up any rulers over them
selves or any laws over themselves which they could not at any
time amend, alter, or abolish. The people o f the United Colo
nies were all right and were believers in popular government
and practiced it, and w rote it in their constitutions. Alexander
Ham ilton and some other reactionaries sympathizing with him
were fundamental Tories and at heart opposed to popular
government.
The principle on icliich this Republic teas founded was not the
representative principle (an incident o f the people's basic
pow er), but was the principle o f popular sovereignty, the prin
ciple that all power was vested in the people by an inalienable
right, indefeasible, and that the people had the right at any
time to exercise this sovereign power.
The Unanimous Declaration o f the Thirteen United States
o f America, issued July 4, 1776, sa id:
W e hold these truths to he self-evident; that all men are created
e q u a l; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable
r ig h ts; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit o f happiness.
That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that when
ever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends it is the
right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new govern
m ent, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers
in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and
happiness.
This declaration is a declaration in effect that all powers o f
government emanate directly from the people. And this right
is reiterated in the constitution o f almost every State in the
Union, declaring in various form s that all powers o f govern
ment spring directly from the people. For exam ple:
A L ABA M A.
1819: “All political potcer is inherent in the people, and all
free governments are founded on their authority and instituted
for their benefit, and therefore they have at all times an inalien
able and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish their form
of government in such manner as they may deem expedient.”
ARKAN SAS.
1836: “ That all power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
their peace, safety, and happiness. For the advancement o f
these ends they have, at all times, an unqualified right to alter,
reform, or abolish their government in such manner as they may
think proper.”
CALIFORNIA.
18.'f9: “All political poicer is inherent in the people.
Gov
ernment is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit o f
the people, and they have the right to alter or reform the same
whenever the public good may require it."
84132— 11872
L
25
COLORADO.
1876: “ That all political poicer if! vested in and derived from
the p eop le; that all government o f right originates from the
people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely
for the good o f the whole.”
CO N N ECT ICU T.
1818: “ That all political pow er is inherent in the people, and
all free governments are founded on their authority and insti
tuted for their benefit, and they have at all times an undeniable
and indefeasible right to alter their form o f governm ent in such
a manner as they may think expedient.”
D ELAW ARE.
1192: “ All ju st authority in the institutions o f political so
ciety is derived from the people and established with their con
sent to advance their happiness, and they may for this end as
circumstances require, from time to time, alter their constitu
tion o f governm ent.”
FLO RID A.
183S: “ That all political poicer is inherent in the people, and
free governments are founded on their authority and estab
lished for their benefit, and therefore they have at all times an
inalienable and indefeasible right to alter or abolish their form
o f governm ent in such manner as they may deem expedient.”
GEORGIA.
1117: “ We, therefore, the representatives o f the people, from
whom all pow er originates and fo r w hose benefit all governm ent
is intended, by virtue o f the power delegated to us, do ordain
and declare, and it is hereby ordained and declared, that the
follow ing rules and regulations be adopted for the future gov
ernment o f this State.”
IDAHO.
1889: “ All political poicer is inherent in the people. Govern
ment is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and
they have the right to alter, reform , or abolish the same ichencver they may deem it necessary, and no special privileges or
immunities shall ever be granted that may not be altered,
revoked, or repealed by the legislature.”
I L L IN O IS .
1818: “ That all pow er is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted fo r
their peace, safety, and happiness.”
INDIANA.
1816: “ That all pow er is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted fo r
their peace, safety, and well being. F or the advancemnt o f these
ends the people have at all times an unalienable and indefeasible
right to alter and reform their governm ent in such manner as
they may think proper.”
IO W A .
18'i6: “ That all political power is inherent in the people.
Government is instituted for the protection, security, and bene
fit o f the people, and they have the right at all times to alter
or reform the same whenever the public good may require it.”
K ANSAS.
1855: “ All political power is inherent in the people. Govern
ment is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and
84132— 11872
2G
they have the right to alter, reform, or abolish the same when
ever they may deem it necessary, and no special privileges or
immunities shall ever he granted that may not be altered, re
voked, or repealed by the general assembly.”
KENTUCKY.
1192: “ That all power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
their pence, safety, and happiness. For the advancement o f
these ends they have at all times an unalienable and indefeasible
right to alter, reform , or abolish their governm ent in such man
ner as they may think proper.”
L O U IS IA N A .
1868: “ A ll men are created free and equal and have certain
inalienable rights; among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit
o f happiness. To secure these rights governments are instituted
among men, deriving their ju st powers from the consent o f the
governed."
M A IN E .
1819: “ All power is inherent in the people; all free govern
ments are founded in their authority and instituted for their
benefit; they have, therefore, an unalienable and indefeasible
right to institute governm ent and to alter, reform or totally
change the same, when their safety and happiness require it.”
M A RYLAN D.
1776: “ That all governm ent o f right originates from the peo
ple, is founded in compact only and instituted solely fo r the good
o f the whole.”
M ASSACH U SETTS.
The first constitution submitted in Massachusetts was rejected
by the people by direct vote at town meetings in the spring o f
1779, because it contained no bill o f rights, and for other rea
sons. The next constitution submitted, that o f 17S0, the people
adopted by direct vote at town meetings and by more than twothirds o f all who voted. The bill o f rights d eclares:
B IL L OF E IG H T S .
1780: “ A rticle I. All men are born free and equal, and have
certain natural, essential, and inalienable rig h ts; among which
may be reckoned the right o f enjoying and defending their lives
and liberties; that o f acquiring, possessing, and protecting prop
erty ; in fine, that o f seeking and obtaining their safety and
happiness.
“ A rt. IT. The people o f this Commonwealth have the sole and
exclu sive tigh t o f governing them selves as a free, sovereign, and
independent State, and do, and forever shall, exercise and enjoy
every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not, or may not
hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States
o f Am erica in Congress assembled.
“ A rt. V. All power residing originally in the people, and being
derived from them, the several magistrates and officers o f gov
ernment vested with authority, whether legislative, executive,
or judicial, are their substitutes and agents and arc at all times
accountable to them ."
M IC H IG A N .
1835: “ All political power is inherent in the people.
“ Government is instituted for the protection, security, and
benefit o f the people; and they have the right at all times to
84132— 11S72
27
alter or reform the same and to abolish one form o f governm ent
and establish another whenever the public good requires it.”
M IN N E S O T A .
1857: “ Government is instituted for the security, benefit, and
protection o f the people, in whom all political power is inherent,
together with the right to alter, m odify, or reform such gov
ernment whenever the public good may require it.”
M IS S IS S IP P I.
1817: “ That all political power is inherent in the people, and
all free governments are founded on their authority and insti
tuted for their benefit, and therefore they have at all times an
unalienable and indefeasible right to alter or abolish their form
o f government in such manner as they may think expedient.”
M IS S O U R I.
1820: “ That all political pow er is vested in and derived from
the people.”
M O N TANA.
1880:
peop le;
founded
good o f
“ All political pow er is vested in and derived from the
all government o f right originates w ith the people, is
upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the
the whole.”
N E B R A SK A .
1866-67: “ All men are born equally free and independent and
have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty, and
the pursuit o f happiness. To secure these rights governments
are instituted among men, deriving their ju st powers from the
consent o f the governed.”
NEVADA.
1861i: “ All political power is inherent in the people. Govern
ment is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit o f the
people, and they have the right to alter or reform the same
w henever the public good may require it.”
N E W H A M P S H IR E .
In New Hampshire fou r constitutions were submitted to the
people, who voted directly upon them at town meetings. The
first three w ere rejected (Am erican Political Science Review,
Vol. II, p. 549) largely because there were no express lim ita
tions upon the power o f the legislature— no bill o f rights. The
bill o f rights o f the fourth one, that o f 1784, declares:
176V/; “ V II. The people o f this State have the sole and e x
clusive right o f governing them selves as a free, sovereign, and
independent State, and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise
and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right pertaining
thereto which is not or may not hereafter be by them expressly
delegated to the United States o f Am erica in Congress assem
bled.”
NEW
JER SE T.
The New Jersey constitution o f 177G declares:
1776: “ W hereas all the constitutional authority ever possessed
by the Kings o f Great Britain over these Colonies or their other
dominions was, by compact, derived from the people and held o f
them for the common interest o f the whole society, allegiance and
protection are, in the nature o f things reciprocal ties, each equally
depending upon the other and liable to be dissolved by the others
being refused or withdrawn. And whereas George III, K ing o f
Great Britain, has refused protection to the good people o f these
84132— 11872
Colonies, and, by assenting to sundry acts o f the British Parlia
ment. attempted to subject them to the absolute dominion o f
that body, and has also made w ar upon them in the most cruel
and unnatural manner for no other cause than asserting their
•just rights, all civil authority under him is necessarily at an end
and a dissolution o f government in each Colony has consequently
taken place.”
N EW
YO RK .
The New York bill o f rights o f 1777 declares:
1777: “ I. This convention, therefore, in the name and by the
authority o f the good people o f this State, doth ordain, deter
mine, and declare that no authority shall, on any pretense w hat
ever, be exercised over the people or members o f this State but
such as shall be derived from and granted by them.”
N O R T H CAR OLIN A .
1776: “ That all political poiccr is vested in and derived from
the people only."
N O RTH D AKOTA.
1889: “ All political power is inherent in the people. Govern
ment is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit o f the
people, and they have a right to alter or reform the same when
the public good may require.”
O H IO .
1802: “ That all men are born equally free and independent,
and have certain natural, inherent, and inalienable rights
* * * and every free republican government being founded
on their sole authority, and organized for the great purpose o f
protecting their rights and liberties and securing their inde
pendence; to effect these ends, they have at all times a com plete
pow er to alter, reform , or abolish their government whenever
they may deem it necessary.”
OKLAH OM A.
1907: “ All political power is inherent in the people; and gov
ernment is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit,
and to promote their general w elfare; and they have the light
to alter or rfiform the same whenever the public good may
require it.”
OREGON.
1857: “ That all power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
their peace, safety, and happiness, and they have at all times a
right to alter, reform , or abolish the government in such manner
as they may think proper.”
P E N N S Y L V A N IA .
1776: “ That the people o f this State have the sole, exclusive,
and inherent right o f governing and regulating the internal
police o f the same.
“ That all pow er being originally inherent in, and conse
quently derived from , the people; therefore all officers o f goverment, whether legislative or executive, are their trustees and
servants, and at all times accountable to them.”
RHODE ISL A N D .
18Ji2: “ The basis o f our political system s is the right o f the
ffeoplc to m ake and alter their constitutions o f governm ent.”
84132— 11872
29
SO U T H CAROLINA.
1790: “ All power is originally vested in the peop le; and all
free governments are founded on tlieir authority and are insti
tuted fo r their peace, safety, and happiness.”
SO U T H D AK O TA.
/
.
1889: “ All men are born equally free and independent and
have certain inherent rights, among which are those o f enjoying
and defending life and liberty, o f acquiring and protecting
property, and a pursuit o f happiness. T o secure these rights
governments are instituted among men, deriving their ju st pow
ers from the consent o f the governed.”
T E N N E SSE E .
1796: “ That all power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
tlieir peace, safety, and happiness; fo r the advancement o f those
ends they have at all times a<n unalienable and indefeasible
right to alter, reform , or abolish the governm ent in such manner
as they may think proper.”
T E XA S
(R E P U B L I C ).
1836: “ All political power is inherent in the people, and all free
governments are founded on their authority and instituted for
their benefit; and they hare at all times an unalienable right to
alter their governm ent in such manner as they may think
p r o p er ”
TEXAS
(
state
).
IS'/o : “ A ll political power is inherent in the people, and all
free governments are founded on their authority and instituted
for their benefit; and they have at all times the unalienable right
to alter, reform , or abolish tlieir form o f governm ent in such
manner as they may think expedient.
UTAH.
1895: “ All political power is inherent in the people, and free
governments are founded on their authority for all their pro
tection and benefit; and they have the right to alter or reform
their governm ent as the public toeifarc may req u ire”
•
VE R M O N T .
1777: “ That all power being originally inherent in, and conse
quently derived from , the people; therefore, all officers o f gov
ernment, whether legislative or executive, are their trustees and
servants, and at all times accountable to them.
♦
#
*
*
*
*
*
“ * * * and that the community hath an indubitable, un
alienable, and indefeasible right to reform , after, or abolish
governm ent in such manner as shall be. by that community,
judged most conducive to the public weal.”
VIRGINIA.
1776: “ That all pow er is vested in, and consequently derived
from , the people.”
W A S H IN G T O N .
1889: “ All political pow er is inherent in the people, and gov
ernments derive their just powers from the consent o f the gov
erned, and are established to protect and maintain individual
rights.”
84132— 11872
•
W E ST V IR G IN IA .
1861-18G3: “ The pow ers o f governm ent reside in all the citi
zens o f the State, and can be rightfully exercised only in ac
cordance with their w ill and appointment.”
W IS C O N S IN .
18'/S: “ All men are born equally free and independent and
have certain inherent rig h ts; among these are life, liberty, and
the pursuit o f happiness; to secure these rights governm ents are
instituted among men. deriving their ju st powers from the con
sent o f the governed.”
W Y O M IN G .
1889: “ All power is inherent in the people, and all free gov
ernments are founded on their authority and instituted fo r
their peace, safety, and happiness; for the advancement o f
these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and inde
feasible right to alter, reform , or abolish the governm ent in such
manner as they may think proper.”
T IIE
T E O rL E
BETTER
A U T H O R IT Y
THAN
H A M IL T O N
OR
P IN C K N E Y .
Mr. President, here it w ill be observed that the people in
the States declare all political power vested in aud derived
from the people, and that they have an inalienable aud inde
feasible right to alter, amend, or abolish, their form o f gov
ernment in such mauuer as they may deem expedient. So
that we do not need the quotations from a few reactionary
citizens who were disobeying their representative instructions
in the secret conclave o f 17S7 to tell us what the Constitution
and the law is.
It is rather astonishing to hear from various men o f learn
ing that the right o f the people to legislate directly is un
constitutional; that it is “ in conflict with the representative
principle on which this Republic is founded.”
This is the same old federalist argument that was answered
in the Supreme Court o f Oregon in the Pacific Telephone case,
where it was urged that the Federal guarantee to the State o f a
republican form o f governm ent would forbid the initiative and
referendum as in conflict with a republican form o f government
or with the so-called representative principle.
(E xhibit R
answers this argument.)
The adoption o f the constitution o f Texas w as an act o f direct
legislation by the people o f Texas by the referendum on the
initiative o f the constitutional convention.
And all o f the State constitutions, almost without exception,
have been adopted by the act o f the people who directly legis
lated in establishing these various State constitutions by the
referendum.
A n d they amend all the constitutions in the same fashion—
by direct legislation, almost without exception.
James Bryce, in his Am erican Commonwealth (M orris Edi
tion. 1906. p. 258), very properly sa ys:
The people frequently legislate directly by enacting or altering a con
stitution.
The principle of popular sovereignty could hardly be ex
pressed more unmistakably. Allowing for the differences to which the
vast size of the country gives rise, the mass o f citizens may be deemed
as directly the supreme power in the United States as the assembly was
at Athens or Syracuse.
Indeed, from the beginning o f the history o f the American
people they exorcised the right o f direct legislation, and exer84132— 11872
31
cised it in the old town meetings o f New England and county
meetings in the South. The Massachusetts towns still govern
themselves by exercising the right o f direct legislation in their
town meetings, both the initiative and the referendum.
And all the States o f the Union from time to time have pro
vided for the exercise o f the right o f direct legislation by va
rious form s o f local option.
To deny the right o f the people to legislate directly is to deny
the fundamental principles o f every one o f the 48 State con
stitutions. The “ representative principle,” so called, is merely
an incident o f the delegation o f legislative and ministerial
power to “ representatives ” as a m atter o f convenience. This
grant o f power to public servants does not, as some statesmen
believe, establish public rulers w hose right to rule can not
be questioned. The grant o f legislative power by the people
to a State legislature in no w ise prevents the people from
exercising their inalienable and indefeasible right o f direct
legislation. The initiative and referendum is perfectly har
monious with the representative principle. In one case the
people legislate through their agents; in the other case they
legislate directly without agents.
It does not overthrow the representative system o f govern
ment ; it perfects the representative system o f government.
Those who favor the initiative and referendum do not intend
to impair the representative system. They are determined
on the contrary to perfect the representative system, which is
and always has been a mixture o f the exercise by the people o f
direct power, direct legislation, add o f indirect legislation
through representatives.
RECALL NO N O V E L T Y .
Even the right o f recall is no novelty under the American
system o f government. Every one o f the 13 Colonies— the State
o f New Hampshire, the State o f Massachusetts Bay, the State
o f Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, the State o f New
Jersey, the State o f New York, the State o f Connecticut, the
State o f Pennsylvania, the State o f Delaware, the State o f
Maryland, the State o f Virginia, the State o f North Carolina,
the State o f South Carolina, the State o f Georgia, on the 24th
day o f July, 1778, solemnly agreed to the A rticles o f Confedera
tion o f 1777, in Article V, to the right o f recall, in w hich it w as
expressly agreed that the various States should appoint delegates
to meet in Congress on the first Monday in November o f every
year—
W ith a power reserved to each State to recall its delegates, or any
of them, at any time within the year, and to send others in their stead
for the remainder of the year.
DEM O CR ATIC
C O N ST IT U T IO N S
E A S IL Y
AM END ABLE.
Our State governments, while establishing the representative
principle as a matter o f convenience, have nevertheless incor
porated in every instance the declared principle that all power
is vested in the people, and that they retain the right at any
time to alter, amend, or abolish.
All democratic constitutions are flexible and easy to amend. This
follows from the fact that in a government which the people really
control the constitution is merely the means of securing the supremacy
of public opinion and not an instrument for thwarting it.
* *
* A
government is democratic just in proportion as it responds to the will
84132— 11872
of thp people; since one way to defeat the will of the people is to make
it difficult to alter the form of Government, it necessarily follows that
any constitution which is democratic in spirit must yield readily to
changes in public opinion.
(Spirit of American Government: Smith.)
The fact is that with the initiative and referendum the peo
ple merely propose to amend the laic establishing the legisla
tures so as to give to the people the option to exercise the right
o f direct legislation where they may find it expedient and proper
to do so. A ll that is necessary is to enlarge the ordinary State
constitution so as to provide fo r the people the method o f di
rectly legislating by passing an initiated bill or vetoing a re
ferred bill. The legislature got its pow er to legislate from
the people and the people violate no principle by exercising
directly the legislative power they possess, and which is inalien
able and indefeasible.
In amending the State constitution so as to reserve to the
people the power to initiate and pass a bill by direct vote, or
by the referendum to veto or affirm, as the case may be, an act
passed by the legislature, the people merely exercise their sov
ereign power in a moderate and restricted way, which they
have found necessary after a hundred years o f experience with
representatives in the legislature who have, particularly in this
generation, too frequently failed to pass the laws the people
want, and who have too frequently passed the laws which the
people do not want.
It is absurd to say that this Republic was founded on the
“ representative principle.” T h is Republic w\as not founded on
the representative principle. I t teas founded on the sovereign
right o f the people to manage their oicn business (and not be
managed by their servants), and it was fo r this reason that
every State constitution declared this fundamental principle
that all political powar was inherent in the people, and that as
sovereign they could at their pleasure alter, amend, or abolish
even the constitutions themselves. This was the great founda
tion stone, and this is the principle now being asserted by the
initiative and the referendum, to w it: The right o f the people
to rule. This is the very meaning o f the word “ dem ocratic.”
Demos kratein means “ the people have the right to rule.” It
is the origin o f the w'ord “ democrat.” A democrat is a man
who believes in the right o f the people to rule.
Aristocracy means the rule o f the few, who consider them
selves the best.
A utocracy means the rule o f a single person.
Plutocracy means the rule o f money.
D em ocracy means the rule o f the people.
Delegating power to public servants was not new. It was a
convenience and a mode o f exercising popular sovereignty, not
a means o f destroying or o f impairing it.
W e established the system o f delegating the legislative power
to representatives in our State constitutions, who should meet
in legislative assembly and debate and discuss ^and fram e wise
and virtuous laws drawn to promote the general*welfare. When
they are candidates they pledge their honor to the people to be
guided by the general welfare. They go to the assembly and
lift their hands to Almighty God and solemnly swear to be faith
fu l to the people, and then special interests come and bring
malign influences to bear upon the weakness o f human nature
84132— 11872
33
that lead the legislator away from the paths o f public virtue
into passing laws against the general welfare, or in refusing to
pass laws required by the general welfare. Representative gov
ernment is a convenience for the people. No progressive wants
to interfere with it or to change it where it is faithful and per
form s its proper du ty ; but when these representatives fail to
pass law s o f vital importance, when they pass laws doing a
gross wrong to the public interest, the time has come when the
people shall directly exercise so much o f their legislative power
as they may find it necessary to exercise at their option in
passing the laws they do want and vetoing the laws they do not
want.
THE
ATHENS
AND ROME ARG U M EN T.
Oh, but say these opponents o f popular government, remember
the overthrow o f the direct democracy o f Athens and Rome.
It is difficult to argue with entire patience with men o f learn
ing and intelligence who w ill offer as a reason against popular
government the so-called direct dem ocracy o f Athens and o f
Rome. We might as well go to Athens and to Rom e to get our
instruction in the management o f modern railways and in
handling the telegraph and telephone.
Only one person in 400 could read in Athens and in Rome.
The people were divided into the very few intelligent and cul
tured and into the very, very many who were ignorant o f letters
and o f the art o f government, five-sixths o f whom were slaves
and the vast m ajority in hopeless poverty. They lacked the
spirit o f liberty, and the father controlled by law the son and his
fam ily as long as the father lived, with power o f life and death
and property.
It avails nothing to say that the populace o f Athens had an
appreciation o f the beautiful form s o f marble which their sculp
tors developed with great cleverness. The vital fact is that
they had no knowledge o f governm ent; that they had no means
o f public communication except by word o f m outh; no knowl
edge o f liberty as we know it; and were actually ruled by an
intellectual, financial, and m ilitary aristocracy under the form s
o f a direct democracy.
To-day the great body o f our citizens can read and write.
To-day we have millions o f books available and libraries every
where. To-day the most distant citizen can by the parcel post
receive for a trilling expense the last word upon organized gov
ernment and the art o f government. To-day we have the tele
graph and the telephone binding the ends o f the w orld together
and putting inform ation with regard to government all over the
world, its weakness and its strength, in the-hands o f every citi
zen who cares to know. To-day we have millions o f men who
do care to know, and who are interested in good government,
and who are determined to have good government and to over
throw the rule o f the self-seeking few and to terminate the
commercial and financial piracy which has been dealing un
justly with the many for the benefit o f the organized few. T o
day we have modern newspapers, a m iracle in art and in de
sign, filled with news brought instantly by telegraph and tele
phone from the ends o f the earth : filled with knowledge, litera
ture, and a r t; tilled with finance and com m erce; filled with
sport and humor and fu n ; filled with ten thousand times ten
84132
11872--------3
thousand wants and opportunities, which the poorest citizen
can buy fo r one-hundredth part o f his daily wage. Compare
Athens and Home o f 2,000 years ago with Washington, Chicago,
or New Y o r k !
Oh, no, Mr. President, the comparison can not be ju stly m ade;
and that the opponents o f popular government should go so far
to find their argument against the rule o f the jieople shows how
poverty stricken and howr poor and how mean are the fallacies
and pretexts upon which they rely.
I N IT IA T IV E AND REFERENDU M J O K E R S .
Mr. President, there are six dangerous jokers which I wish
to call attention to and which the friends o f popular govern
ment should beware of.
Joker 1. Lim iting the initiative to statute laws and pro
hibiting the voters from proposing and adopting amendments to
the State constitutions.
The constitutional initiative is the most vital part o f any
amendment. For in the State constitutions are many jokers
restraining popular government that need correction by constitu
tional amendment.
Joker 2. T o require an improbable or impossible m ajority
necessary to enact or reject measures submitted to the voters.
Every measure voted on should be decided by the m ajority
o f the votes cast thereon.
Joker 3. To require large petitions to render it difficult to se
cure them, no matter what per cent is required.
This is done by increasing the percentages beyond reason or
to require a certain per cent o f the legal voters o f certain
counties.
The signature o f any voter in the State should count regard
less o f residence.
Joker 4. To so fram e the emergency clause that the legisla
ture may annul the referendum whenever it chooses. The
emergency should only be declared upon a two-thirds m ajority
o f ail members on a recorded vote, setting forth the reasons for
the em ergency.
Joker 5. To put an arbitrary lim it upon the number o f meas
ures w hich may be submitted to the people at any one election,
because the special interests can thus preclude submission o f
public measures by offering trivial measures in advance o f the
public measure.
Joker G. Failure to provide an adequate and efficient method
o f inform ing the voters concerning the measures submitted to
them. The only safety for the political machine is to keep the
people in ignorance.' The Oregon publicity pamphlet inform s
the people. Insist on the publicity pamphlet.
I submit herewith a model constitutional amendment for the
initiative and referendum, free from jokers, and self-executin g:
PRO PO SED
C O N ST IT U T IO N A L A M E N D M E N T FOR T H E
EN DU M .
IN IT IA T IV E
AND REFER
The legislative authority of this State shall be vested In a legisla
tive assembly consisting of a senate and house of representatives, hut
the people reserve to themselves the power to propose legislative meas
ures, resolutions, lairs, and amendments to the constitution, and to
enact or reject the same at the polls, independent o f the legislative
assembly, and also reserve power, at their own option, to approve or
reject at the polls any act, item, section, or any part of any resolution,
act, or measure passed by the legislative assembly.
S4132— 11S72
35
The first power reserved by the people is the initiative, and not
more than 8 per cent, nor in any case more than 50.000. of the legal
voters shall be required to propose any measure by initiative petition,
and every such petition shall include the full text of the measure so
proposed.
Initiative petitions, except for municipal and wholly local
legislation, shall be filed with the secretary of state not less than four
months before tho election at which they are to be voted upon.
If
conflicting measures submitted to the people shall be approved by a
majority of the votes severally cast for and against the same, the one
receiving the highest number of affirmative votes shall thereby become
law as to ail conflicting provisions.
Proposed amendments to the
constitution shall in all cases be submitted to the people for approval
or rejection.
The initiative is also reserved as follo w s: If at any time, not less
than 10 days prior to the convening of the general assembly, there shall
he filed with the secretary of state an initiative petition for any meas
ure signed by 1 per cent, nor in any case more than 5,000 legal voters,
the secretary of state shall transmit certified copies thereof to the house
of representatives and to tho senate immediately upon organization. If
said measure shall be enacted, either as petitioned for or in an amended
form, it shall be subject to referendum petition as other measures. If
it shall be enacted in an amended form, or if no action is taken thereon
within four months from the convening of the general assembly, it shall
be submitted by the secretary of state to the people at the next regular
general elect ion, provided such submission shall be demanded by sup
plementary initiative petition signed by 4 per cent, nor in any case
more than 30,000, legal voters and filed not less than four months be
fore such election. Such proposed measure shall be ‘■abmitted either as
introduced or with the amendments, or in any amended form which may
have been proposed in the general assembly, as may be demanded in
such supplemental petition. If such measure so submitted be approved
by the electors, it shall be law and go into effect, and any amended
form of such measure which may have been passed by the general as
sembly shall thereby stand repealed.
The second power is the referendum, and it may be ordered either
by petition signed by the required percentage of the legal voters or by
the legislative assembly as other bills are enacted.
Not more than 5
per cent, nor in any case more than 30,000 legal voters, shall be re
quired to sign and make a valid referendum petition. Only signatures
of legal voters whose names are on the registration books and records
shall be counted on initiative and on referendum petitions.
If it shall be necessary for the immediate preservation of the public
peace, health, or safety that a measure shall become effective without
delay, such necessity shall be stated in one section, and if. by separate
vote of yeas and nays, three-fourths of all the members shall vote on
a separate roll call in favor of the measure going into instant opera
tion. because it is necessary for the immediate preservation of the
public peace, health, or safety, such measure shall become operative
upon being filed in the office of the secretary of state or city clerk as
the case may he: Provided, That an emergency shall not be declared on
any measure creating or abolishing any office or to change the salary,
term, or duties of any officer or granting any franchise or act alienating
any property of the State. If a referendum petition shall be filed against
an emergency measure such measure shall become a law until it is voted
upon by the people and if it is then rejected by a majority of those vot
ing upon the question such measure shall be thereby repealed.
No
statute, ordinance, or resolution approved by vote of the people shall be
amended or repealed by the legislative assembly or any city council
except by throe-fourths vote of all the members taken by yeas iind nays.
The provisions of this section apply to city councils.
The initiative and referendum powers of the people are hereby fur
ther reserved to the legal voters of each municipality and district as to
nil local, special, and municipal legislation of every character in and
for their respective municipalities and districts.
Every extension, en
largement, purchase, grant, or conveyance of a franchise or of any
rights, property, casement, lease, or occupation of or in any road, street,
alley, or park, or any part thereof, or in any real property, or interest
in any real property owned by a municipal corporation, whether the
same be made by statute, ordinance, resolution, or otherwise, shall be
subject to referendum by petition. In the case of laws chiefly of local
interest, whether submitted by initiative or referendum petition cr by
the legislative assembly, shall be voted upon and approved or rejected
only by the people of the locality chiefly interested, except when the
legislative assembly shall order the measure submitted to the people of
the State. Cities and towns may provide for the manner of exercising
841 3 2 — 1 8 7 2
-1
36
initiative and referendum powers as to their municipal legislation sub
ject to the general laws o f the State. Not more than 10 per cent of
the legal voters may be required to order the referendum nor more than
15 per cent to propose any measure by the initiative in any city, town,
t ' local subdivision of the State.
The filing of a referendum petition against one or more items, seedons, or parts of any act, legislative measure, resolution, or ordinance
shall not delay the remainder of the measure from becoming operative.
Referendum petitions against measures passed by the legislative assem
bly shall be filed with the secretary o f state not later than 90 days
after the final adjournment of the session of the legislative assembly
at which the measure on which the referendum is demanded was passed,
except when the legislative assembly shall adjourn at any time tem
porarily for a period longer than 90 days, in which case such refer
endum petitions shall be filed not later than 90 days after such tem
porary adjournment. The veto power of the governor or the mayor shall
not extend to measures initiated by or referred to the people.
A ll
elections on general, local, and special measures referred to the people
of the State or of any locality shall be had at the regular general elec
tions, occurring not less than four months after the petition is filed,
except when the legislative assembly or the governor shall order a
special election, but counties, cities, and towns may provide for special
elections on local matters.
Any measure initiated by the people, or
referred to the people as herein provided, shall take effect and become
law if it is approved by a majority of the votes cast thereon and not
otherwise.
Every such measure shall take effect 30 days after the
election at which it is approved. The style of all bills shall b e : “ Be it
enacted by the people of (name of State, municipality, or co u n ty).”
This section shall not be construed to deprive any member of the legis
lative assembly or of a city council of the right to introduce any meas
ure. The whole number of electors who voted for governor at the regu
lar election last preceding the filing o f anv petition for the initiative or
for the referendum shall be the basis on which the number of resistered
voters necessary to sign such petition shall be computed. Petitions and
orders for the Initiative and for the referendum shall he filed with the
secretary of state or in municipal or local elections with the countv or
city clerk or such other officer as may be provided by law.
In sub
mitting the same to the people he and all other officers shall be guided
by the general laws until additional legislation shall be especially pro
vided therefor. This amendment shall be self-executing, but the legis
lature may enact laws facilitating its operation. A ll proposed measures
submitted to the people shall be printed in pamphlet form, together
with arguments for and against, as may be provided for bv law, and
mailed by the secretary o f state to the electors at least 50 days before
the election at which they are to be voted.
O B J E C T IO N S TO T H E
I N IT IA T IV E AND BEFER EN D U M .
Mr. President, what are the objections to the initiative and
referendum ?
First, it has been objected that it was contrary to the socalled “ representative” principle o f the Constitution. This
objection I have abundantly answered. (E xhibit B .)
Second, that the people are not capable o f direct legislation.
The contrary has been abundantly shown by the experiences
in all o f the States and countries which have put it iuto effect.
Third, that representative dem ocracy is better than direct
democracy. The answer to this is that there is no such issue,
since the optional initiative and referendum in nowise inter
feres w ith representative democracy.
Fourth, that the initiative and referendum would destroy de
liberation, debate, and result in hasty legislation. The fact is
an initiated bill is usually drawn by a group o f patriotic citi
zens, w ho prepare the bill with infinite pains, consulting the best
experts in the State, and only present it to the State aftc-r it
has been thoroughly considered.
It appears In the public
prints; it is discussed by the citizens from one end o f the State
to the oth er; it is presented to each citizen o f the State in a
84132— 11872
37
publicity pamphlet, giving the arguments for and against it,
and a sufficient length o f time before the election, that each
citizen can thoroughly understand it ; and then each citizen in
the State, in the quiet and seclusion o f the ballot box. expresses
his opinion with regard to it, w ithout excitement and without
passion and w ith the utmost deliberation.
In Congress w e pass volumes o f bills. Is it incredible that
the citizens who have the intelligence to select Senators and
Presidents should also have the intelligence to pass one bill, or
even two or three bills?
I have heard o f hasty legislation by representatives, without
much debate in legislatures, and sometimes in a conference
committee important legislation has been put on a tariff bill
by misrepresentatives at the instance o f private interests and
against the general w elfare in great haste and without debate.
Such hasty law s under a referendum could be vetoed by the
people and ought to be vetoed.
T H E T E O rL E W I L L NOT VOTE— F A L LA C Y .
The crowning charge against the initiative and referendum
by the form er Senator from Texas is that only a small per cent
o f the people w ill vote, and his data is based on the cases o f
compulsory referendum. In Oklahoma the percentages have
run from 54 to 100 per cent o f the citizens voting. In Maine it
has run from 50 to 100 per cent. In Missouri, from 71 per cent
to 05 per cen t; in Arkansas, from 75 per cent to 90 per cent;
in Montana, from 72 per cent to 80 per cent; in Oregon it has
run from 01 per cent up to 90 per cent; in South Dakota, from
57 per cent to 92 per cent.
Those who do not vote on these questions o f public policy
submitted by the initiative and referendum are those citizens
w ho are ignorant or indifferent to such questions o f public
policy, and who voluntarily disfranchise themselves, leaving the
more intelligent and more interested citizens to decide these
questions. This voluntary disfranchisement o f the unfit is o f
public benefit.
But, Mr. President, out o f 187 yea-and-nay votes in the Senate
previous to the retirement o f the Senator he himself appears
only to have voted IS times, or less than 10 per cent. The
people appear to be from 500 to 900 per cent better than this
record, and are otherwise not justly subject to his criticism.
I submit an Exhibit A to my remarks upon this question
giving iu detail the percentages o f votes in various States and
the principles governing the initiative and referendum and ask
that it be printed as a Senate document.
Mr. President, the restoration o f popular government is ab
solutely essential to tlie w elfare and happiness o f the Am eri
can people. The time has come when we must terminate the
gross abuses o f machine politics, when we must purify our
governmental processes and establish the best form o f govern
ment o f which the Am erican intelligence and conscience is
capable. The people’ s rule system o f government is not, or
should not be. a partisan question. This issue o f the people's
rule goes to the root o f all oilier questions because all modern
questions practically com prise some form iu which the rights,
the interests, the health, and the happiness o f the people is
S 4132— 11S72
33
interfered with by the special interests seeking profit or promo
tion through the machine method o f government. It is abso
lutely essential for the people to announce a new Declaration o f
Independence, freedom from the rule o f the few, freedom from
the rule o f the special interests, freedom from the machine poli
ticians who are in alliance with the special interests which have
perverted the great Republic from its noblest ideals to sordid
and selfish ends. In the w ords o f the immortal L in coln :
It is for us, the living, to highly resolve that this Nation, under God.
shall have a new birth cf freedom, and that government of the people,
by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth.
T H E R E A SO X S I X B R IE F J U S T I F T I X G D IRECT L E G IS L A T IO X .
The reasons in brief which ju stify direct legislation have been
perhaps best stated by Prof. Frank Parsons in 1900, since de
ceased. Prof. Parsons was a great publicist, with no ax to
grind, no political ambition, and no other purpose than to serve
God and mankind “ in spirit and in truth.”
Direct legislation— that is, direct legislation by the optional
initiative and referendum.
1. Is essential to self-government.
2. D estroys the private monopoly o f lawmakers.
3. Is a common-sense application o f the established principles
o f agency.
4. W ill perfect the representative system.
5. Is immediately and easily practicable.
0. Makes fo r political purity.
7. K ills the lobby.
8 . Makes it useless to bribe legislators because they can not
deliver the goods.
9. Attracts better men to political life.
10. Simplifies elections.
11. Simplifies the law.
12. Lessens the pow er o f partisanship.
13. Elevates the press and the people.
14. Stops class legislation.
15. Opens the door o f progress.
1G. Is wisely conservative.
17. W orks an autom atic disfranchisem ent o f the unfit.
18. Tends to stability.
19. 7s a safety valve for discontent.
20. Is in line with the general trend o f modern political his
tory throughout the world.
I might add to these reasons—
21. Causes public servants to do their utmost to serve the
public interest, knowing that the power o f the people is over
them directly.
22. It thus enthrones righteousness and the general w elfare
by giving sovereign power to the intelligence and conscience
o f the Nation.
23. It tends pow erfully to educate the people on questions o f
public policy and increases the general intelligence.
24. t* w ill enable the people to pass a thoroughgoing corruptpractices act, a mandatory direct primary, and other progres
sive statutes necessary to establish the i>eople’s rule, which r.
machine-controlled legislature otherwise can and will prevent.
84132-11872
T II F O B JE C T IO N S TO T H E I N IT IA T IV E AND REFERENDUM
Are imaginary or based on erroneous information. Under
the initiative and referendum only a fe w ( not many, a sob jected )
important laws would be referred to the people or initiated by
the people.
The initiative and referendum is not hasty, without delibera
tion or by impulse, as objected, but the most deliberate o f all leg
islative processes, usually taking about two years.
It is objected that from 20 to H per cent o f the people do
O
not vote on initiated measures. This only means that the ig
norant or indifferent voter voluntarily disfranchises himself,
leaving the questions o f public policy to be decided by more in
telligent and interested voters.
It is objected that the voters can not pass on complicated
laws. The answer to this is that, com plicated or not, the people
well know the difference between honest and dishonest laws,
between ju st and unjust laws, and when they have the power
to kill the latter no more o f them are apt to be made. Moreover,
it is easier to pass upon a law in black and white, even if com
plicated, than to pass upon a complicated man and what he w ill
do under the influence o f the lobby.
I t is objected that it is impracticable. This objection is
based upon unadulterated ignorance.
It is objected w e should “ elect better men.” W e have tried
this game long enough. It has failed. The system under which
the “ big stick ” hangs over the “ representative man ” w ill
make him better. It makes an unfaithful servant powerless,
and this is the man w e are after.
It is objected that direct legislation w ill destroy representa
tive government. This is purely imaginary. It w ill perfect
representative government and make the representative per
form his duty or enable the people to correct his sins o f om is
sion or his sins o f commission.
To accomplish integrity o f government and perfect the sys
tem o f popular government, w e need—
First. An adequate registration system to register all entitled
to vote, so that no person not entitled shall be registered, and
open at all times to public examination.
Second. A secret ballot— Australian system— under which the
financial and commercial bullies can not coerce or bribe the
weak citizen whose bread and butter they control.
Third. A direct mandatory primary, by which the voters can
select their candidates regardless o f the political machine.
Fourth. A statute preventing corrupt practices, directly lim
iting the use o f money, preventing bribery, coercion, and fraud,
requiring publicity o f campaign contributions, and giving the
voter peace and absolute security from pressure on election day.
Fifth. A constitutional amendment fo r the initiative and r e f
erendum fo r every State, and statutes vitalizing the same so
that the people can amend their State constitution when they
like and can enact any laws they do want or veto any laws they
do not want, in spite o f the machine or the Influence o f political
mercenaries.
Sixth. A statute providing publicity pamphlets, giving each
citizen before election time full inform ation and arguments for
and against all public measures and fo r and against all public
candidates.
Seventh. A statute providing fo r the recall, by which the
people can nominate a successor to an incompetent, unfaithful,
or obnoxious public servant.
Eighth. Local self-governm ent fo r cities and towns by com
mission, with the initiative, referendum, and recall.
Ninth. The short ballot, with preferential provisions, by which
the votes o f unorganized citizens may be autom atically cohered.
Tenth. The direct election o f United States Senators.
Eleventh. The direct nomination o f presidential candidates.
These are the chief agencies by which we shall restore the
integrity and the efficiency o f our Government, and o f these
agencies “ the initiative and the referendum ” arc first, because
they open the door to all the others.
Mr. President, in my judgment the Senate o f the United
States should throw the weight o f its influence in favor o f the
initiative and referendum and not against it. I therefore offer
a substitute for Senate resolution 413. Strike out all after the
resolving clause in Senate resolution 413 and insert the follow
ing :
That the system of direct legislation, such as the optional initiative
and referendum adopted by Oklahoma. Oregon, California. Washington,
Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Montana. North Dakota. South Dakota, Mis
souri, Arkansas, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Maine, is in harmony
with and makes more effective the representative system and the prin
ciple of the sovereignty of the people upon which this Republic was
founded, and is not in conflict with the republican form of government
guaranteed by the Constitution.
84132— 11872
CLOTURE IN THE SENATE
“ The minority veto in the Senate, with its power to prevent the
majority from fulfilling its pledges to the American people, should end.
The right to obstruct the public business by a factional filibuster must
cease. The power of an individual Senator to coerce or blackmail the
Senate must he terminated. These national evils can no longer be con
cealed by the false cloak of ‘ freedom of debate.’ ”
SPEEC H
OP
IION. ROBERT L. OWEN
OF
OKLAHOM A
IX THE
SENATE OF TIIE UNITED STATES
JU LY 14, 1913
W A SH IN G T O N
21124— 123SG
1913
==s
S PEECH
OF
IION. R O B E R T
L.
O WE N .
A M EN D M EN T OF T H E B U L E S.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, I offer tlie follow ing resolution
fo r reference to the Committee on R u les:
R e s o l v e d , That Rule X IX o f the standing rules o f the Senate be
amended by adding the fo llo w in g :
“ S ec . 0. That the Senate may at any time, upon m otion o f a Sena
tor, fix a day and hour fo r a linal vote upon any matter pending in the
S en a te: P r o v i d e d , h o w e v e r , That this rule shall not be invoked to pre
vent debate by any Senator who requests opportunity to express his
views upon such pending m atter w ithin a time to be fixed by the
Senate.
“ The notice to be given by the Senate under this section, except by
consent, shall not be less than a week, unless such requests be made
within the last two w'ecks o f the session.”
For the foregoing stated purpose the follow in g rules, namely, V II,
V III, IX . X, X II, X X II, X X V I, and X L, are m odified:
“ A ny Senator may demand o f a Senator making a m otion if it be
made fo r dilatory or obstructive purposes, and if the Senator making
the motion declines or evades an answer or concedes the motion to
have been made fo r such purposes, the President o f the Senate shall
declare such m otion out o f order.”
Mr. President, tlie m inority veto in the Senate, with its power
to prevent the m ajority from fulfilling its pledges to the Am eri
can people, should end. The right to obstruct the public business
by a factional filibuster must cease. The power o f an individual
Senator to coerce or blackmail the Senate must be terminated.
These national evils can no longer be concealed by the false
cloak o f “ freedom o f debate.”
Those who defend the antiquated rule o f unlimited parlia
mentary debate do so chiefly on the ground o f precedent. The
precedents o f the intellectual world, o f the parliamentary world,
are entirely against the preposterous rule which has been per
mitted to survive in the United States Senate alone. W hat are
the precedents o f other parliamentary bodies?
PRECEDENTS.
The precedents in the State o f Maine and in every New Eng
land State, in every Atlantic State, in Gulf State, in every
Pacific State, in every Rocky Mountain State, in every Missis
sippi Valley State, and in every State bordering on Canada are
against unlimited debate or the m inority veto. In both the sen
ate and house o f every State the precedent is to the contrary.
The precedent is against it in New Hampshire.
The precedent is against it in Vermont.
The precedent is against it in Massachusetts.
The precedent is against it in Rhode Island and Connecticut.
What Senator from the New England States w ill venture to
say that the precedents o f every single one o f the New England
States are unsound, unwise, and ought to be modified to conform
to the superior wisdom o f the Senate rule?
21124— 1238G
3
4
The precedent is against it in New York, and in Pennsyl
vania, and in New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and
W est Virginia. W hat Senator upon this floor representing these
Commonwealths w ill venture to say that the people o f his State
have adopted a false standard o f parliamentary practice which
they ought to abandon for the superior virtue o f the minority
veto established in the Senate by an archaic rule o f 1806?
The precedent in North Carolina, in South Carolina, in
Georgia, in Alabama, in Mississippi, and Tennessee is against it.
W ill the Senators from these States say that the parliamentary
rule and practice o f their own States, which they have the
honor to represent upon this floor, are unwise and not safe and
should be modified to comply with the superior rule o f the
m inority veto?
The precedents o f Louisiana, Michigan, Indiana. Illinois, and
Kentucky, o f Missouri, Iow a, W isconsin, and Montana, o f the
Dakotas, o f Nebraska, and Kansas, are all against this unwise
practice o f the United States Senate.
The precedents o f Colorado, Wyoming, and Minnesota, o f
Idaho, o f Nevada, o f Arizona and New M exico, and o f the great
Pacific States— Washington, Oregon, and C alifornia— provide for
the closing o f debate and are against the evil practice which
still remains in vogue in the United States Senate.
Why, Mr. President, the precedent o f every city, big and
little, in the United States is against the right o f m inority veto
under the false pretense o f “ freedom o f debate.”
Every one o f the 48 States o f the Union, while permitting
freedom o f debate, has set us the wise and virtuous precedent
o f permitting the control by the m ajority. I remind every Sena
tor in this body that in his own State his legislative assembly,
whether in the house or in the senate, does not permit a minor
ity veto under the pretense o f freedom o f debate. It is the
rule o f common sense and o f common honesty.
In the House o f Representatives o f the Congress o f the United
States the right to move the previous question and limit debate
has been wisely and profitably practiced since its foundation.
E N G L IS H L E E C E D E X T S.
The rule o f the m ajority is the rule in all the parliaments o f
English-speaking people. In the Parliament o f Great Britain,
in the House o f Lords, the “ con ten ts” pass to the right and
the “ not contents ” pass to the left, and the m ajority rules.
In the House o f Commons the “ ayes ” pass to the right and
the “ n o e s ” pass to the left, and the m ajority rules. (E n cyclo
p edia Britanniea. vol. 20, p. 856.)
The great English statesman, Mr. Gladstone, having found
that the efficiency o f Parliament w as destroyed by the right
o f unlimited debate, w as led to propose cloture in the first
week o f the session o f 1882, moving this resolution on the 20th
o f February, and expressing the opinion that the House should
settle its own procedure. The acts o f Mr. Gladstone and others
o f like opinion finally led to the termination o f unlimited de
bate in the procedure o f Parliament. In these debates every
fallacious argument now advanced by those who wish to retain
unlimited debate in the United States Senate has been abun
dantly answered, leaving no ground o f souud reasoning to recon
sider these stale and exploded arguments.
21124— 1258C
5
The cloture o f debate is very commonly used in the Houses
o f Parliament in Great Britain, for example, in standing order
No. 26. The return to order o f the House o f Commons, dated
December 12, 1906, shows that the cloture was moved 112 times.
(See vol. 94, Great Britain House o f Commons, sessional papers,
1906.)
FRAN CE.
In France the cloture is moved by one or more members cry
ing out “ La cloture ! ”
The president immediately puts the question, and if a member o f the
m inority wishes to speak he is allowed to assign his reasons against
the close o f the debate, but no one can speak in support of the m otion
and only one member against it.
The question is then put by the
president, “ Shall the debate be c lo s e d ? ” and if it is resolved in the
affirmative the debate is closed and the main question is put to the
vote.
M. Guizot, speaking on the efficacy o f the cloture before a
committee o f the House o f Commons in 1848, s a id :
I think that in our chamber it was an indispensable power, and I
think it has not been used unjustly or im properly generally. Calling
to mind what has passed o f late years, I do not recollect any serious
and honest com plaint o f the cloture. In the French Chamliers, as they
have been during the last 34 years, no member can imagine that the
debate would have been properly conducted w ithout the power o f pro
nouncing the cloture.
He also stated in another part o f his evidence that—
Before the introduction o f the cloture in 1814 the debates were pro
tracted indefinitely, and not only were they protracted, but at the end,
when the m ajority wished to put an end to tne debate and the minority
would not, the debate became very violent for protracting the debate,
and out o f the house among the public is was a source of ridicule.
The French also allow the previous question, and it can al
ways be m oved; it can not be proposed on motions for which
urgency is claimed, except after the report o f the committee o f
initiative. (D ickinson's Itules and Procedure o f Foreign Par
liaments, p. 426.)
G ERM AN Y .
The m ajority rule controls likewise in the German Empire
and they have the cloture upon the support o f 30 members o f
the house, which is immediately voted on at any time by a
show o f hands or by the ayes and noes.
AU ST R IA -H U N G A R T .
In Austria-Hungary motions for the closing o f the debate
are to be put to the vote at once by the president w ithout any
question, and thereupon the matter is determined. I f the ma
jority decides for a close o f the debate, the members whose
names are put down to speak fo r or against the motions may
choose from amongst them one speaker on each side, and the
matter is disposed o f by voting a simple yes or no. (Ibid., p.
404.)
A U S T R IA .
Austria also, in its independent houses o f Parliament, has the
cloture, which may be put to the vote at any time in both
houses, and a small m ajority suffices to carry it. This is done,
however, without interrupting any speech in actual course o f
delivery; and when the vote to close the debate is passed each
side has one member represented in a final speech on the ques
tion. (Ibid., p. 409.)
21124— 12586
Iii Belgium they have the cloture, and if the prime minister
and president o f the Chamber are satisfied that there is need o f
closing the debate a hint is given to some member to raise the
cry o f “ La cloture,” after a member o f the opposition has con
cluded his speech, and upon the demand o f 10 members, grant
ing permission, however, to speak for or against the motion
under restrictions. The method here does not prevent any rea
sonable debate, but permits a termination o f the debate by the
w ill o f the m ajority. The same rule is follow ed in the Senate
o f Belgium. (D ickinson’s Rules and Procedure o f Foreign Par
liaments, p. 420.)
In Denmark also they have the cloture, which can be pro
posed by the president o f the Danish chambers, which is decided
by the chamber without debate. Fifteen members o f the Landsthing may demand the cloture. (Ibid., p. 422.)
N E TH E R L A N D S.
In both houses o f the Parliament o f Netherlands they have
the cloture. Five members o f the First Chamber m ay propose
it and five members may propose it in the Second Chamber.
They have the m ajority rule. (Ibid., p. 401.)
PORTU GAL.
In Portugal they have the cloture in both chambers, and de
bate may be closed by a special motion, without discretion. In
the upper house they permit two to speak in favor o f and two
against it. The cloture may be voted. (Ibid., p. 469.)
S P A IN .
The cloture in Spain may be said to exist indirectly, and to
result from the action allowed the president on the order o f
parliamentary discussion. (Ibid., p. 477.)
S W IT ZE R L A N D .
The cloture exists in Switzerland both in the Conseil des
Etats and Conseil National.
Many o f the ablest and best Senators who have ever been
members o f this body have urged the abatement o f this evil,
including such men as Senator George G. Vest, o f M issouri;
Senator Orville H. Platt, o f Connecticut; Senator D avid B.
H ill, o f New Y ork ; Senator George F. Hoar, o f M assachusetts;
and Senator H enry C abot L odge, o f Massachusetts, who in
troduced resolutions or spoke fo r the amendment o f this evil
practice o f the Senate. (Appendix. Note A .)
Mr. President, the time has come in the history o f the United
States when Congress shall be directly responsive to the w ill
o f the m ajority o f 90,000.000 o f people without delay, evasion,
or obstruction. W e are in the midst o f the most gigantic cen
tury in the history o f the world, when every reason looking to
the w elfare and advance o f the human race bids us march fo r
w ard in compliance w ith the magnificent intelligence and
humane impulses o f the Am erican people.
W e have the most important problems before us— financial,
commercial, sociological. Fifteen great propositions o f improve
ment o f government were pledged by the recent I>emocratic
platform , and almost a like number were pledged by other
party platforms. W e have work to do that means the preserva
tion, the conservation, and the development o f human life, o f
21124— 12586
I
7
human energy, o f human health. W e have before us the great
problem s which mean the development o f this vast country,
and we should have the machinery o f government by which to
respond with reasonable promptitude to mature public opinion,
but the rules o f the Senate have been such as to prevent a ctio n ;
the rules o f the Senate are such as to prevent action now w ith
regard to the great questions before the country. The rules o f
the Senate have put the power in the hands o f a small faction
or o f a single individual to obstruct, without reason, and to pre
vent action by Congress. I favor the right o f the m ajority of
the Senate to control the Senate after giving every reasonable
freedom o f debate to the opposition, so that the people o f the
country may have both sides o f every proposition. But I am
strongly opposed to the m inority veto, or to a single Senator
obstructing and preventing the control o f the Senate by the
responsible m ajority.
In a short session o f Congress the Senate w ill appropriate a
thousand million dollars in less than 350 working hours. Each
w orking hour means the appropriation o f $3,000,000 o f the hardearned taxes taken from the labor o f the Am erican people.
Every two minutes the Senate averages an appropriation o f
$100,000 o f taxes, and yet, instead o f addressing itself to a
comprehension o f the necessity for such taxes, fo r such expendi
ture, a single Senator, or a small faction or a m inority, may
detain the Senate fo r hours and for days and for weeks while
great questions o f public policy wait, leaving the Senate to be
thus distracted by filibustering tactics, discussions o f immate
rial or trivial matters, reading o f worthless papers and statis
tics— in a deliberate obstruction o f the m ajority by the minority.
EX TR E M E D IF F IC U L T Y I X O B T A IN IN G L E G ISL A T IO N TITAT IS
OF V A L U E , EVEN W IT H O U T A F IL IB U S T E R .
C O N FESSE D LY
Mr. President, before a bill can be passed that is desired by
the Am erican people, no matter how worthy, it must first be
carefully drawn, submitted to the House o f Representatives,
and by the House submitted to a committee, and almost inva
riably such a bill is sent from the committee o f the House to
the executive department fo r a report; and when the report
comes in it is considered in the committee, and finally and
usually, where the m ajority desires the bill passed, it w ill be
reported back to the House—abundant opportunity having been
thus given to discover its weak points or defects.
When it goes to the House it takes its place upon the calen
dar and awaits the time with patience when it can be taken up
on the calendar.
It must be read three times in the House, it must be printed,
it is discussed in the House, and. finally, if after having passed
every criticism and scrutiny it be approved by the m ajority o f
the House, it is signed by the Speaker and finds its w ay to the
United States Senate. When it reaches the Senate it is again
sent to a committee, the committee further considers it, and,
finally, if a m ajority favor, it is reported back to the Senate
to take its place upon the calendar. And many a good bill has
died on the calendar in the Senate because o f a single objection
to it— what might be called the private right o f veto by an
individual Senator. I f at last it is permitted, by consent, to
come before the Senate and does not excite any prolonged de
ll 1124— 12580
bate, it may become a law by reason o f a m ajority vote o f those
present. But if anywhere along the line o f this slow, deliberate
procedure any serious objection is raised by a minority or by
a Senator either can by dilatory motions, by insisting upon
hearings, by making the point o f “ no quorum,” by using a
Senator’s right to object and demand the regular order, by
using his position to ask reconsideration and a rehearing, or,
perhaps, an additional report from the executive department,
and then demanding hearings in the executive department while
the report is delayed, and in a thousand other ingenious ways a
single Senator, much less a faction or w illful minority, can
make it almost impossible to pass a bill o f great merit. For
three years I have been trying to pass a bill to establish an
improved organization o f the Bureau o f Public Health and have
been unable to get any action for or against by Congress.
I only refer to this as an example o f many meritorious meas
ures which have never been acted upon, and for which there is
a powerful matured public sentiment urgently insisting upon
action.
The Senate o f the United States has rules for its conduct that
make it almost impossible to get a bill through, except by unani
mous consent, where a resolute m inority is opposed to the pas
sage o f the bill. Under the so-called privilege o f “ freedom o f
debate ” a group o f Senators can hold up any measure indefi
nitely by endless talk in relays and by the use o f dilatory mo
tions, making the point o f “ no quorum,” moving to “ adjourn,”
moving to “ take a recess,” moving to “ adjourn to a day cer
tain,” reading fo r an hour or so from Martin Chuzzlewit or
Pickwick Papers, making the point o f “ no quorum,” moving to
“ adjourn,” making the point o f “ no quorum,” moving to “ ad
journ to a day certain,” moving to “ take a recess,” moving to
go into “ executive session,” and, under the rules, may read a
few chapters o f Huckleberry Finn— and this puerile conduct is
dignified by the false pretense o f being “ freedom o f debate,”
when, in point o f fact, it is nothing o f the kind. It is the
minority obstruction and the personal veto under the pretense
o f freedom o f debate, under the false pretense o f freedom o f
debate, under the contemptible and odious pretense o f freedom
o f debate.
It is not freedom o f debate.
The country has been very greatly harmed under the pres
ent rules, as I shall show before this debate concludes. At
present I am simply laying a preamble for the consideration
o f this matter. It is going to take much time. It is going
to be debated at considerable length in this body. It is going
before the country fo r the country to determine whether
or not men shall be permitted by the people o f the United States
to stand upon the floor o f the Senate and favor the control o f
the m ajority by the m inority and favor a policy o f making it im
possible fo r party pledges to be carried out in this Republic.
I w ill not say there is not the possibility, under some circum
stances. o f some good ensuing from a vigorous protest by the
minority. I am perfectly willing to agree to that. But yielding
that point in no way affects the validity o f the argument that
the m ajority should be charged with the responsibility o f gov2 112 4 — 12080
9
em inent; and I in no wise m odify the comment I have made
upon the' odious pretense o f “ freedom o f debate ” in this body,
which has served as a cloak for a m inority veto and for im
proper processes in this body. I say it is not freedom o f debate.
The minority veto is, in effect, a denial o f freedom o f debate.
A man in charge o f an important bill is driven to refrain from
debating the bill because he would be playing into the hands o f
the opponents o f the bill, who are trying to kill the bill by
exhausting the patience o f the Senate by endless volubility and
unending dilatory motions.
This thoughtless rule o f unlimited freedom o f debate was
adopted in 180G, when there were 34 Senators, who met together
to discuss their common affairs in courtesy and good faith, when
only a very few bills were brought before the Senate. They had
no conception that unlimited freedom o f debate really meant a
minority veto. Now that the Senate has 9G Members, repre
senting 90,000,000 people, when its interests are o f the most
gigantic importance, when its modern problems o f stupendous
consequence are demanding prompt and virile action, when hun
dreds o f important bill3 are pending, this hoary-headed repro
bate rises up and strikes a posture o f inscrutable wisdom and
admonishes the w orld not to touch this sacred principle o f un
limited “ freedom o f debate.” The venerable age o f this foolish
precedent shall not save it from the ju st charge o f im becility
and legislative vice.
The power to obstruct the w ill o f the people by the Senate
rules is the last ditch o f privilege.
In the House o f Representatives the party in power w ith
its m ajority is carrying out the w ill o f the m ajority, per
mitting reasonable debate and wide publicity to the views o f all
Members.
But in the Senate, while we have reorganized
the committees and have made important improvements in the
rules, there still remains the point o f unlimited debate, o f ir
relevant debate, o f dilatory motions, whereby the minority can
still prevent the action o f the m ajority placed in power by the
people. The United States Senate is the only place where the
people’s w ill can be successfully thwarted, and here it can be
obstructed and denied by delays, by dilatory motions, by irrele
vant debate, and unlimited discussion.
It is easy to pass unobjected bills in the Senate; and there
are a great many bills that are brought up in the Senate that
are unobjected bills. But I w ill say that objected bills do not
pass through the Senate.
The new m ajority o f the Senate is honestly pledged to the
people’s cause, and they must carry out their pledges if they
wish to retain the approval o f the people o f the United States.
I am in favor o f m ajority rule.
I am in favor o f making the national w ill immediately effec
tive.
I am in favor o f the Senate o f the United States having the
opportunity to do the things required by our great Nation.
I am opposed to the m inority veto.
I am opposed to the discouragement o f honest discussion by
the invitation to minority filibuster which this rule o f unlimited
debate invites.
21124— 1258G
I am opposed to legislative blackmail, which this rule o f un
limited debate encourages, for w e have all seen the Senate con
sent to appropriations and important amendments to important
bills which ought not to have been made, but which were made
rather than jeopardize the bill by the endless debate o f a
Senator proposing and insisting on an amendment.
The m inority veto permits the m ajority to be blackmailed
on the most important measures in order to conciliate the un
ju st demands o f the minority. The time has come to end this
sort o f unwise parliamentary procedure with its train o f evil
consequences.
I believe in the freedom o f debate. I invite the freedom o f
debate, but liberty is one thing and gross abuse o f liberty is
another thing.
Freedom o f debate is a valuable principle,
wrnrthy o f careful preservation, for the m ajority is often in
structed by the m inority; but freedom o f debate is one thing,
and uncontrolled time-killing talk and unrestrained verbosity
used to enforce a factional veto is another thing.
The amendment to Rule X I X which I have proposed does not
prevent reasonable debate by any Senator, but it does permit the
m ajority, after due notice, to bring a matter to a conclusion
whenever it has become obvious that the debate is not sincere,
but is intended to enforce a m inority veto.
Senator Vest, December 5, 1894, well sa id:
That these rules “ coerce the Senators in charge o f a bill into
silence.”
That “ with the people o f the United States demanding action
we have rules here that absolutely prevent it.”
That these rules “ facilitate parliamentary blackmail.”
That the history o f the Senate is full o f important amend
ments being put upon important bills, “ under the threat that
unless placed there the debate would be indefinite and almost,
interminable.”
This rule has brought the Senate o f the United States into
disrepute, has greatly diminished its Influence, has given it
the reputation o f being an obstructive body, and many men have
been led to believe that the Senate was coerced and controlled
by a corrupt minority. Certain it is that if a m inority can
exercise the veto, the corrupt interests o f the country could well
afford com m ercially to promote the election o f men to the floor
o f the Senate, so as to obstruct legislation to which they
objected.
It is the result o f these very rules which has led the people o f
the United States to demand by a unanimous voice the direct
election o f Senators, so as to bring public pressure o f the
sovereign people on individual Members o f the Senate, and com
pel them to respect the wishes o f the people, under penalty o f
retirement from public life.
I pause here to say that for 90 years the people o f this
country have been trying to establish the rule o f direct election
o f Senators, and it has always been the Senate that has pre
vented the people from having their will with regard to this
matter. Five times the measure passed the House o f Repre
sentatives, the last tw o times almost by a unanimous vote o f
the Members representing the people o f this country in the
various congressional districts; yet the Senate stood like a
21124— 12586
1
1
stone wall, refusing under these rules to carry out the w ill o f
the people o f the United States. The same thing has been
measurably true in regard to many other important items.
I venture now, Mr. President, seriously and solemnly to
remind every Senator upon this floor who votes against this pro
vision, who votes against m ajority rule in the Senate, who votes
against a reasonable control by the Senate itself o f its own
deliberations, that he w ill have to answer for such vote before
the people o f his State, who will in the future elect the Senators
by direct vote o f the people and who will nominate them by
direct vote o f the people. And the Senator who by virtue o f any
precedent or prejudice opposes in this body the free right o f the
m ajority to rule w ill invite defeat by the m ajority o f the people
in his own State, who surely believe in m ajority rule and w ill
resent the support o f minority rule by their Senators on this
floor.
I have no fear o f m ajority rule. I never have been afraid
o f m ajority rule. The only thing we need to fear is the rule o f
the m inority by artifice and by wrongdoing. And I say frankly
to my colleagues from the South that the black-and-white
scarecrow o f the force bill is a ghost for which I have no
respect. W e are entering a new era o f m ajority rule, which w ill
deal justly and generously to rich and to poor alike, and with
equal generosity, justice, and mercy to men o f the black race,
as well as to the men o f the white race or to any other race.
W e need have no fear o f m ajority rule.
Mr. President, I wish it to be clearly understood that my
demand for a change o f the rules o f the Senate is not at all
due to the idea that the adoption o f such a rule is necessary in
order to pass the tariff bill or any other particular bill pending
or to be brought forw ard. My reason for this demand is that
I think the w elfare o f the Nation requires it ; that the right
o f the Am erican people to a prompt redemption o f party prom
ises is involved. The right o f the American people to have
their will expressed at the polls promptly carried out I regard
as an imperative mandate from a Nation o f 90.000.000 people,
and I think that a Senator who stands in the way o f that man
date fails to perceive his duty to our great Nation, and that he
should not be surprised if the m ajority, who will in future
nominate Senators and elect Senators, w ill hold him to a strict
account fo r a denial o f the right o f the m ajority to rule.
I remind the Senate that in three years over 30 living Sena
tors who opposed the wishes o f the American people for the
direct election o f Senators have been retired by the people.
*
P A R T Y PLEDG ES.
The Dem ocratic Party makes certain pledges to the people
and appeals to the people for their support upon these pledges
promised to be perform ed; the Republican Party does likew ise;
yet neither party, if in a m ajority, can control the Senate so
long as the m inority veto remains as a part o f the rules o f the
Senate. I f this rule is not changed, then both parties in future
campaigns should put the follow ing proviso as an addenda to
their national party p la tform s:
P r o v i d e d , h o w e v e r , That in making the above pledges to the American
people it is distinctly to be understood by the people, that we make these
pledges on the understanding that the opposite party does not forbid us
to carry out our promises by obstructing the fulfillment o f our promise
2 1 1 2 4 — 1258G
/
to you by filibustering in the Senate, in which event we will agree to
sustain the right o f the opposite party to veto the redemption o f our
pledges to you, by leaving the rules o f the Senate in such a condition
that the opposing party may veto our effort to redeem the promises
made to you.
I f the party trusted by the people is so imbecile as to leave
the Senate itself subject to the veto o f the defeated party, it
will deserve future defeat for such perfidious conduct.
The people o f the United States have the right to rely upon
the party placed by them in power to fulfill the party pledges
made to the people, aud if the leaders o f both parties connive
w ith each other in the Senate to sustain the m inority veto under
the pretense o f “ freedom o f debate,” they w ill have betrayed
the promises made to the people, both expressed and implied.
I f this rule be not changed so as to establish m ajority rule in
the Senate, and so as to enable either party to carry out its
promises to the American people, then neither party responsible
fo r such conduct deserves the confidence o f the people o f the
United States, and the people may well say in regard to party
promises made under such circumstances, as said by Macbeth in
the w itches’ scene—
And be these juggling fiends no more believ’d
That palter with us in a double sen se;
That keep the word o f promise to our ear
And break it to our hope.
Senator Vest, o f Missouri, in 1S93 introduced the follow ing
resolution, the most moderate form o f terminating so-called de
bate (C ongressional Record, p. 45, Dec. 5, 1S94) :
Amendment intended to be proposed to the rules o f the Senate,
namely, add to Rule I the follow in g section :
“ S kc. 2. W henever any bill, motion, or resolution is pending before
the Senate as unfinished business and the same shall have been debated
on divers days, am ounting in all to 30, it shall be in order for any
Senator to move that a time be fixed for the taking a vote upon such
bill, motion, or resolution, and such motion shall not be amendable or
debatable, but shall be immediately p u t : and if adopted by a m ajority
vote o f all the Members o f the Senate, the vote, upon such bill, motion,
or resolution, with all the amendments thereto which may have been
proposed at the time o f such motion, shall be had at the date fixed in
such original m otion without further debate or amendment, except by
unanimous consent, and during the pendency o f such motion to fix a
date, and also at the time fixed by the Senate for voting upon such
bill, motion, or resolution no other business o f any kind or character
shall be entertained, except by unanimous consent, until such motion,
bill, or resolution shall have been finally acted upon.”
Hon. Orville H. Platt, on September 21, 1893, introduced the
follow ing resolution (p. 163G ):
W henever any bill or resolution is pending before the Senate as
unfinished business the presiding officer shall, upon the written request
o f a m ajority o f the Senators, fix a day and hour, and notify the Sen
ate thereof, when general del>ate shall cease thereon, which time shall
not be less than five days from the submission o f such request, and
he shall also fix a subsequent day and hour, and notify the Senate
thereof, when the vote shall be taken on the bill or resolution and
any amendment thereto w ithout further debate, the time for taking the
vote to be not more than tw o days later than the time when general
debate is to cease, and in the interval between the closing o f general
debate and the taking o f the vote no Senator shall speak more than five
minutes, nor more than once upon the same proposition.
And, among other things, s a id :
The rules o f the Senate, as of every legislative body, ought to fa cili
tate the transaction o f business. I think that proposition will not be
denied. The rules o f the Senate as they stand to-day make it im
possible or nearly impossible to transact business. I think that propo
sition will not be denied. We as a Senate are fa st losing the respect
21124— 12586
13
o f the people o f the United States. W e are fa st being considered a body
that exists for the purpose o f retarding and obstructing legislation. We
are being compared in the minds o f the people o f this country to the
House o f Lords irt England, and the reason fo r it is that under our
rules it is impossible or nearly impossible to obtain action when there
is any considerable opposition to a bill here.
I think that I may safely say that there is a large m ajority upon this
side o f the Senate who would favor the adoption o f such a rule at the
present time.
Mr. Hoar, o f Massachusetts, 1893, submitted to the committee
a proposed substitute, as follow s (p. 1637) :
R e s o l v e d , T hat the rules o f the Senate be amended by adding the
fo llo w in g :
“ When any hill or resolution shall have been under consideration
fo r more than one day it shall be in order fo r any Senator to demand
that debate thereon be closed.
I f such demand be seconded by a
m ajority o f the Senators present, the question shall forthw ith be taken
thereon w ithout further debate, and the pending measure shall take
precedence o f all other business whatever. I f the Senate shall decide to
close debate, the question shall be put upon the pending amendments,
upon amendments o f which notice shall then be given, and upon the
measure in its successive stages according to the rules of the Senate,
but w ithout further debate, except that every Senator who may desire
shall be permitted to speak upon the measure not more than once and
not exceeding one hour.
“ A fter such demand shall have been made by any Senator no other
m otion shall be in order until the same shall have been voted upon by
the Senate, unless the same shall fail to be seconded.
“ A fter the Senate shall have decided to close debate no motion shall
be in order, but a m otion to adjourn or to take a recess, when such
m otion shall be seconded by a m ajority o f the Senate. When either o f
said motions shall have been lost or shall have failed o f a second it
shall not be in order to renew the same until one Senator shall have
spoken upon the pending measure or one vote upon the same shall have
intervened.
“ For the foregoing stated purpose the follow in g rules, namely, V II,
V III, IX . X, X II, X IX , X X II, X X V II, X X V III, X X X V , and XL, are
modified.”
Mr. L odge , o f Massachusetts, also then, as now, Senator o f
the United States from Massachusetts, supported this proposal,
using the follow ing language (p. 1637) :
It is because I believe that the moment fo r action has arrived that
I desire now simply to say a word expressive o f my very strong belief
in the principle o f the resolution offered by the Senator from Connecti
cut, Mr. Flatt.
We govern in this country in our representative bodies by voting and
debate. It is most desirable to have them both. Both are o f great im
portance. But i f we are to have only one. then the one which leads to
action is the more important. To vote without debating may be hasty,
may be ill considered, may be rash, but to debate and never vote is
imbecility.
I am well aware that there are measures now pending, measures
with reference to the tariff, which I consider more injurious to the
country than the financial measure now before us. I am aware that
there is a measure which has been rushed into the House o f Representa
tives at the very moment when they are calling on us Republicans for
nonpartisanship which is partisan in the highest degree and which in
volves evils which I regard as infinitely worse than anything that can
arise from any econom ic measure, because it is a blow at human rights
and personal liberty. I know that those measures are at hand. I know
that such a rule as is now proposed will enable a m ajority surely to
put them through this body after due debate and will lodge in the hands
o f a m ajority the power and the high responsibility which I believe the
m ajority ought alw ays to have. But, Mr. President, I do not shrink
from the conclusion in the least. I f It is right now to take a step like
this, as I believe it is. in order to pass a measure which the whole
country is demanding, then, as it seems to me. it is right to pass it for
all measures. I f it is not right fo r this measure, then it is not right to
pass it for any other.
I believe that the most im portant principle in our Government is that
the m ajority should rule. It is for that reason that I have done what
lay in my power to promote what I thought was for the protection o f
21124— 12580
u
elections, because I think the m ajority should rule at the ballot box. I
think equally that the m ajority should rule on this floor— not by violent
methods, but by proper dignified rules, such as are proposed by my
colleague and by the Senator from Connecticut. The country demands
action and we give them words. For these reasons, Mr. President, I
have ventured to detain the Senate in order to express my most cordial
approbation o f the principle involved in the proposed rules which have
ju st been referred to the committee.
Senator David B. Hill, o f New York (1893), proposed the fo l
low ing amendment (p. 1G39) :
Add to Rule IX the follow in g section :
“ S ec . 2. W henever any bill or resolution is pending before the Sen
ate as unfinished business and the same shall have been debated on
divers days amounting in all to 30 days, it shall be in order for any
Senator to move to fix a date for the taking o f a vote upon such bill or
resolution, and such motion shall not be amended or debatable; and if
passed by a m ajority o f all the Senators elected the vote upon such bill
or resolution, with all the amendments -thereto which may be pending
at the time o f such m otion, shall be immediately had w ithout further
debate o r amendment, except by unanimous consent.”
Only last Congress, April G, 1911, the distinguished Senator
from New York, Mr. B o o t , introduced the follow ing resolu tion :
R e s o l v e d , That the Committee on Rules be, and it is hereby, instructed
to report fo r the consideration o f the Senate a rule or rules to secure
more effective control by the Senate over its procedure, and especially
over its procedure upon conference reports and upon bills which have
been passed by the House and have been favorably reported in the Sen
ate. (C o n g r e s s io n a l R ec or d , vol. 47, pt. 1, p. 107.)
21124— 12586
o
EE MARKS
OF
IION. ROBERT L. OWEN
OF OK LAH O M A
IN THE
SENATE OF TIIE UNITED STATES
DECEMBER 9, 1913
On the importance of saving time in the United States Senate and
need for cloture in order to have time for prompt considera
tion of the numerous statutes required for the conser
vation and promotion of human life, human
efficiency, and human happiness
W A S H IN G T O N
1914
24417— 12047
RE MA RK S
OF
HON .
ROBERT
L.
O WE N
Thursday, D ecem ber 9, 1913.
T h e S e n a t e , a s in C o m m it t e e o f t h e W h o le , h a d u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n
th e b ill ( H . R . 7 8 3 7 ) t o p r o v id e f o r th e e s t a b li s h m e n t o f F e d e r a l r e s e r v e
h a n k s , f o r f u r n is h in g a n e l a s t i c c u r r e n c y , a f f o r d in g m e a n s o f r e d is c o u n t
in g c o m m e r c ia l p a p e r , a n d t o e s t a b li s h a m o r e e f f e c t iv e s u p e r v is io n o f
b a n k in g in t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , a n d f o r o t h e r p u r p o s e s .
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, during the last 10 days Senators
on the opposite side of the aisle have frequently made it a mat
ter of entertainment to be making the point of no quorum for
the obvious purpose of delaying and wasting time. It is per
fectly well known to every Senator who has made the point of
no quorum that the Members of this body are in the cloakroom
or in the immediate vicinity if they are not on the floor. I be
lieve it has only occurred once, or perhaps twice, that it took
some minutes to obtain a quorum. The country might as well
observe what the meaning of this is. and I wish to call the at
tention of the country to the attitude of Senators who are
wasting the time of this body.
Mr. BRISTOW. Mr. President-----The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Oklahoma
yield to the Senator from Kansas?
Mr. OWEN. I decline to be interrupted, Mr. President. *
Mr. BRISTOW. I thought the Senator would in making such
remarks as those.
Mr. OWEN. Yes; I do; especially by the Senator from
Kansas, whose lack of self-restraint has been so obvious.
The Congress o f the United States has a vast work to per
form. This currency bill is only a part of it; the tariff bill was
only a part of it. Under the head of currency matters we have
still many other things which are necessary to be done by Con
gress. We should have a codification of the national bank acts;
we should have laws passed controlling the abuses, the outrages,
of the various stock exchanges, of the exchanges that gamble
with food products, with agricultural products, and help to fix
high prices upon this country. We should pass laws that are
necessary to control the abuses of the clearing houses.
We should pass laws prohibiting interlocking directorates,
which control banking systems and trust companies and great
industrial companies and railways, linked together on a gigan
tic scale and thus making effective private monopoly. We
ought to pass laws establishing an agricultural credit system
in this country, a matter of the most serious importance in
promoting the food products of this Nation and in promoting
the production of the raw materials which come out of the soil.
We ought to pass the necessary measures which will control the
abuses of private monopoly in this country, and yet day after
24417— 12647
3
day is wasted by idle talk upon the floor of the Senate and by
call after call for a quorum, when it is perfectly well known
that a quorum will immediately respond to the roll call. We
ought to pass laws solving the problem of the high cost of living,
which is making the ordinary citizen of this country tremble
under the load he carries.
We ought to pass laws providing for good roads in this
country ; we ought to pass laws providing for the develop
ment of our national waterways. I have some other things
to present which this Congress ought to consider and act on. and
I propose to place them in the R ecord now for the information
of the country—not for the information of the Senate, for the
Senate knows perfectly w
rell what they are. We ought to pass
a law establishing an independent bureau of puli'ic health to
protect the public health o f this country, which i» w is simply
under the jurisdiction of a branch of the Treasury Department,
relatively obscure, smothered, ineffective, although not without
much value. We ought to pass laws protecting child labor in
this country; we ought to pass a proper employees’ insurance
system; we ought to pass proper laws for the compensation of
workmen; we ought to pass laws establishing proper safety
appliances and steel cars on the railway systems of the country;
we ought to pass a law for the “ probation of convicts” for the
benefit of young men who are convicted for the first time, young
men who are sent to their ruin by the cruel hand of society, liecause they make a single mistake.
Year after year I have tried to secure the passage of such a
bill through the Senate, and have made no progress. We ought
to have cold-storage legislation; we ought to have legislation to
bring about pure fabrics and honest measures of goods that are
sold to our people; we ought to have a better system for the
proper control of railway rates; we ought to have a better sys
tem for the control of the issue of stock and bonds, so that the
people o f this country may not be unfairly taxed by the issue
of fraudulent watered securities; we ought to establish voca
tional education in this country, so as to teach the boys and •
girls, the young men and women, of this country bow to make a
living.
How shall we ever consider these things when day after day
is used up in idle debate, without any economy whatever of the
time of the Senate? That is the reason why these seats of
Senators are vacated It is because Senators who have made up
their minds, have studied the question, jlo not want to stay a
whole week listening to a debate which no longer instructs or
interests. That is evidently the reason why Senators vacate
their seats—because the debate on the floor of the Senate has
become a farce.
We ought to establish postal telegraphs and postal telephones
cheap and at the convenient service o f the people instead o f a
monopoly controlled by a few men unfairly taxing the people
and giving them indifferent and poor service.
The Government of the United States ought to owu plants
for making its own armor plate, for making its owm powder,
for making its own guns and materials of war, and for build
ing its own battleships. We have not time even to discuss such
questions, but have spent about 10 hours during the last week
debating a motion to meet at 10 o’clock in the morning.
24417— 12647
We ought to have proper legislation to build up the merchant
marine of the American Nation. Our flag is practically never
seen in foreign ports, and hardly ever seen in our own ports.
We ought to take steps, through the Legislature of this Nation,
in the House of Representatives and in the Senate, to promote,
bring about, and establish universal peace, which we could do
if we spent the same amount of money and energy in promoting
peace that we do in building navies and in supporting armies.
Nevertheless, until we have a better condition, we ought to
have time to consider the naval program and the development
of our military forces.
We ought to have time to discuss on the floor of the Senate
the right o f the women o f this country to the equal privilege of
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This question affects
the right o f 45,000,000 Americans. Yet we talk from noon till
10 or 11 o’clock at night on Hetch Hetchy, a serious waste of
time, because two or three days would be sufficient for the
Frisco water supply.
We ought to have an opportunity to discuss upon the floor
licentiousness In the public press, which under present condi
tions is able to give publicity broadcast and wholesale and con
tinuously to things that are untrue and against the public in
terest. The fountains of information for the people are fre
quently poisoned by reckless publications that ought to be
guided by law along the lines of decency and moderation, at the
same time that full liberty of the press is preserved. We have
not time to debate such questions, but can discuss questions of
order at length.
We shall have to pass in the Senate a thousand million dol
lars of appropriations, and the time will come in the Senate
when in a few hours you will see rushed through this body
appropriation bills carrying $100,000,000 with very little analyti
cal discussion. We never have had time even to pass on the ques
tion of a budget or to take the necessary steps to adequately
provide for the adequate ecouomy and efficiency of the Govern
ment.
We have had volumes of reports on economy and efficiency.
I have tried to read them. I have read them in part. I doubt
if many Senators on the floor have had time to read these re
ports, which have cost this Nation thousands and thousands of
dollars. Yet the recommendations there would seem to be of
great value in promoting both economy and efficiency of gov
ernment.
We ought to have a national progressive inheritance tax as
a part of the fiscal system, as every country in Europe has,
because no State can make it effective.
We ought to have the “ gateway amendment’’ passed by
which to make comparatively easy the amendment of the Con
stitution of the United States by the people, because whenever
you come into a condition where a vested wrong is established
you will find always that the Constitution is urged to prevent a
remedy for the people. We could not pass an income tax be
cause the Constitution forbade it, according to the interpreta
tion of a divided court.
W'e ought to pass an act providing for a presidential primary
for the nomination and election of Presidents.
24417— 12647
I
v
6
We ought to have an act passed that will establish the im
provement o f judicial processes in this country, by which the
people may obtain quick justice and cheap justice.
We ought to have laws improving the conditions o f labor.
We ought to have a legislative reference bureau and drafting
division for the Senate and for the Congress. It is on the
calendar. Every time it is brought up objection is made to its
consideration.
We ought to have the systematic development of our water
powers and laws passed to encourage and direct them.
We ought to have laws passed for the proper conservation
and use of our national forests and of our national minerals,
laws that will enable the living generation to enjoy them, to use
them, and to conserve them.
We ought to have our patent laws perfected.
There are innumerable questions affecting the welfare of this
Nation, in the way of social and industrial reforms, which
ought to be considered by the Senate. The time of the Senate
ought not to be washed, and I want to put in the R ecord my
protest against it.
I do not make these observations because of the banking and
currency bill. The banking and currency bill is only one of the
many things which ought to be passed by the Congress.
The reforms have been pledged or suggested in various plat
forms, not only Democratic platforms but other platforms, rep
resenting large groups of people.
I have in my hand a splendid statement of the various needed
social and industrial reforms, which was put into the platform
o f the Progressive Party of the Nation, a party which regis
tered 4,000,000 votes.
It proposes the conservation of human resources through en
lightened measures of social and industrial justice.
It proposes effective legislation, looking to:
The prevention of industrial accidents;
Occupational diseases, overwork:
Involuntary unemployment and other injurious effects inci
dent to modern industry;
The fixing of minimum safety and health standards for the
various occupations, and the exercise of the public authority of
State and Nation, including the Federal control over interstate
commerce and the taxing power, to maintain such standards;
The prohibition o f child labor;
Minimum wage standards for working women, to provide a
“ living scale” in all industrial occupations;
The prohibition o f night work for women and the establish
ment of an eight-hour day for women and young persons;
One day’s rest in seven for all wageworkers;
The 8-hour day in continuous 24-hour industries;
The abolition of the convict contract-labor system, substitut
ing a system of prison production for governmental consumption
only, and the application of prisoners’ earnings to the support
of their dependent families;
Publicity as to wages, hours, and conditions of labor; full
reports upon industrial accidents and diseases; and the opening
to public inspection of all tallies, weights, measures, and check
systems on labor products;
• tl 7— 12647
24
(
Standards of compensation for death by industrial accident
and injury and trade diseases, which will transfer the burden
of lost earnings from the families of working people to the in
dustry, and thus to the community;
The protection of home life against the hazards of sickness,
irregular employment, and old age. through the adoption of a
system of social insurance adapted to American use;
The development of the creative labor power of America
by lifting the last load of illiteracy from American youth and
establishing continuous schools for industrial education under
public control and encouraging agricultural education and dem
onstration in rural schools;
The establishment of industrial research laboratories to put
the methods and discoveries of science at the service o f Amer
ican producers.
These are some of the social and industrial reforms which
ought to be considered, which ought to be provided for, as far
as the Federal Government can do so or promote them. And
I want to protest again against the waste of time in the United
States Senate. The time has come for cloture in the Senate
of the United States. The time has come when Senators who
want to address the Senate upon a subject shall be given a
reasonable time within which to do it, and then yield the floor
to other Senators.
24417— 12047
o
SPEECH
OF
IION.
ROBERT
L.
O WE N
ON AFFAIRS IN MEXICO.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, I believe that many of the peo
ple o f the United States do not fully appreciate the facts which
have justified the United States in refusing to recognize Huerta,
in demanding an apology, in taking possession of Vera Cruz,
and in massing its forces in preparation for dealing in other
ways, perhaps, with Gen. Victoriano Huerta. I feel impelled to
present some of the facts which have justified our conduct and
which would now justify the United States in demanding and
enforcing by arms, if otherwise unavoidable, the restoration of
“ Government of the people, by the people, and for the people,”
to the hands of the people of Mexico, and the overthrow' of
the cruel commercialized military oligarchy now riding the
people o f Mexico to ruin and chaos.
When Victoriano Huerta usurped the presidency of Mexico
by military revolution February 18, 1913, he found immediate
opposition. The legislature of the State of Coahuila passed
resolutions instantly supporting Madero (Feb. 19). This reso
lution made Madero’s death expedient to Huerta to prevent
organized support of Madero. Madero was killed (Feb. 22,
1913) at once.
It soon became obvious to Huerta that his only chance to
hold his power against Carranza and Zapata fighting for the
constitution was by exciting a war or some act of aggression by
the United States which would enable him through misguided
patriotism to rally behind himself the leaders of the constitu
tionalist movement. Huerta thought he could by exciting their
patriotism make them forget or condone his crimes in resisting
a common foe and thus get them to support his leadership.
From many quarters since last summer the authorities of the
United States have had reason to know of Huerta’s wicked
purpose against the United States.
Finally, when the unspeakable misconduct of Huerta’s admin
istration had not yet moved the United States to take any
aggressive action against Huerta, a step was taken by one of
Huerta’s subordinate officers at Tampico which could not be
overlooked or condoned. One o f Huerta’s subordinate officers,
on the 9th of April, 1914, in all human probability instigated
by Huerta himself, arrested at Tampico a paymaster o f the
U. S. S. Dolphin and a boat’s crew, all in the uniform of the
United States. Our sailors were unarmed and entered Tampico
to purchase some gasoline. Two of them were in our boat with
the flag o f tlie United States at the bow and the stern o f the
boat, and upon our own soil under the international law. Our
unarmed men, in the uniform of the United States, were then
44815—13387
3
f
fc'l
r
r
r
y
4
paraded through the streets of Tampico as a public spectacle,
subsequently released with an apology from the subordinate
officer and later with an expression of regret from Huerta. But
Huerta deliberately declined to salute the flag, under the rules
of international law, as demanded by the President of the
United States, for this international affront and indignity, while
he temporized for 10 days with President Wilson, evidently with
a view to obtaining a cargo o f 250 machine guns and 2,000,000
rounds o f ammunition which were expected to arrive by a Ger
man merchant ship at Vera Cruz on Tuesday, April 21. The
President of the United States gave Huerta until 6 o’clock
Sunday night, April 19, to make the amends required by interna
tional law. The salute was not made. On Monday, April 20,
the President of the United States presented the matter to the
Congress o f the United States, and Congress passed a resolution
as follow s:
T h a t t h e P r e s id e n t i s j u s t i f i e d in t h e e m p lo y m e n t o f t h e a r m e d f o r c e s
o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s to e n f o r c e h is d e m a n d f o r u n e q u iv o c a l a m e n d s
f o r c e r t a in a f f r o n t s a n d in d i g n it i e s c o m m i t t e d a g a in s t t h e U n it e d S t a t e s .
B e i t f u r t h e r r e s o lv e d t h a t t h e U n it e d S t a t e s d i s c l a i m s a n y h o s t i l i t y
t o t h e M e x ic a n p e o p le o r a n y p u r p o s e t o m a k e w a r u p o n M e x ic o .
This resolution was justified by a preamble referring to the
facts presented by the President in his message to Congress of
the 20th of April.
The Senate of the United States, after discussion, voted down
a substitute preamble to this resolution, offered by the distin
guished Senator from Massachusetts, as follows:
T h a t t h e s t a t e o f u n r e s t r a in e d v io le n c e a n d a n a r c h y w h ic h e x i s t in
M e x ic o , t h e n u m e r o u s u n c h e c k e d a n d u n p u n is h e d m u r d e r s o f A m e r ic a n
c it iz e n s a n d t h e s p o li a t i o n o f t h e ir p r o p e r t y in t h a t c o u n t r y , t h e i m
p o s s ib il i t y o f s e c u r in g p r o t e c t io n o r r e d r e s s b y d i p lo m a t i c m e t h o d s in
t h e a b s e n c e o f la w f u l o r e f f e c t iv e a u t h o r i t y , t h e I n a b ilit y o f M e x ic o t o
d is c h a r g e i t s i n t e r n a t io n a l o b l i g a t i o n s , t h e u n p r o v o k e d i n s u l t s a n d
in d i g n it i e s in f lic t e d u p o n t h e f la g a n d t h e u n if o r m o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s
b y t h e a r m e d f o r c e s in o c c u p a t io n o f la r g e p a r t s o f t h e M e x ic a n t e r r i
t o r y h a v e b e c o m e in t o le r a b le .
T h a t t h e s e l f -r e s p e c t a n d d i g n i t y o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s a n d t h e d u t y
t o p r o t e c t it s c it iz e n a n d it s i n t e r n a t io n a l r i g h t s r e q u ir e t h a t su c h
a c o u r s e be f o llo w e d in M e x ic o b y o u r G o v e r n m e n t a s t o c o m p e l r e s p e c t
a n d o b s e r v a n c e o f i t s r ig h t s .
Those who voted against the amendment proposed by the
Senator from Massachusetts, I feel sure did not question the
truth o f the statements in the preamble, but thought it unwise
to repeat these grievances for fear that it would lead to imme
diate war, as the preamble justified immediate intervention and
the President had not recommended intervention. The Govern
ment o f the United States had been sincerely endeavoring in
true friendship to use its good offices to restore peace in Mexico
without resorting to armed force, hoping that Huerta and his
associates would consent to hold an honest election and restore
constitutional government in Mexico. This hope has utterly
failed, and in the meantime a terrific war is being waged by
armies of Mexicans fighting for liberty and demanding constitu
tion and reform.
Mr. President, I voted against the preamble proposed by the
Senator from Massachusetts, although I fully recognized the
truth of its recitations, because I very greatly desired to have
an adjustment of the difficulties in Mexico with as little loss
o f life as possible, and I desired to hold up the hands of the
President of the United States in his anxious and patriotic
purpose to secure the adjustment o f these difficulties peacefully,
44915— 13387
5
if possible. But, Mr. President, I wish that the people of the
United States and that the people of the world might know
that our seizure of Vera Cruz and our demand of Huerta to
salute the flag had behind it the most abundant justification,
and I think that the world should know what the conditions
are which have confronted us on our immediate borders and
which not only have justified our extremely moderate and
considerate conduct in this matter but which would now justify
the United States in demanding the complete restoration of
peace and order in Mexico and the l’eestablisliment of liberty
and the actual sovereignty o f the people of Mexico. The wel
fare o f the whole world depends upon the establishment of the
ideals of the Republic of the United States, of “ constitutional
liberty and order and justice between man and man.” The peo
ple of the United States do not desire in any degree to control
the affairs of the people of Mexico, but I do believe that the
people o f the United States very greatly desire the restoration
o f liberty, justice, and constitutional self-government in Mex
ico, so that the people o f Mexico can enjoy the rights of life
and liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and enjoy the fruit of
their own labors.
The President, in his message to Congress, sa id :
We do not desire to control in any degree the affairs of our sister
Republic. Our feeling for the people of Mexico is one of deep and
genuine friendship, and everything that ws have so far done or re
frained from doing has proceeded from our desire to help them, not to
hinder or embarrass them. We would not wish even to exercise the
good offices of friendship without their welcome or consent. The
people of Mexico are entitled to settle their own domestic affairs in
their own way and we sincerely desire to respect their right.
Mr. President, I .agree with this generous sentiment and
I wish we might assist the people o f Mexico to restore orderly
government without such enormous destruction o f life and prop
erty. At present, in the attempt to establish order, a series of
daily bloody battles are in progress, with thousands of men
being killed on the battlefields of Torreon. Monterey, Tampico,
and so forth. The people of Mexico have no way in which to
express their opinion but by battle. They have no elections in
Mexico which deserve to be called by the name. The last elec
tion, of October 26, 1913, was a willful fraud and a corrupt
mockery of the people o f Mexico, engineered by a military oli
garchy, directed by Huerta.
Secret instructions were sent out from Mexico City Octo
ber 22, 1914, in Huerta’s interest to have the votes counted for
Huerta and to make the elections void as to the presidency by
returning a deficient number o f precincts, which, under the
Mexican law. would leave Huerta as provisional President, and
this was accomplished under Huerta’s dictatorship.
Mr. President, the real difficulty in Mexico is the establish
ment of a commercialized military oligarchy, enjoying every
form o f privilege and monopoly at the expense o f the rights
of the people of Mexico, millions of whom are denied the rights
of property, of liberty, and of life itself. Under this heartless
organization the wages of the people are not sufficient to sus
tain a civilized human being, provide food and shelter, much
less provide any opportunity for instruction or for human prog
ress. It is the same condition which caused the great French
Revolution in 1789. The muraer in Mexico o f American citi
zens, and of Englishmen and o f Germans and of Frenchmen and
44915— 13387
(»
of Spaniards, and the wholesale robbery and destruction o f
property under the lawless conditions which have ensued from
this primary cause are merely details of an unavoidable result.
The usurpation and violence of Huerta, his insult to our flag
and uniform, are details of the egregious crime against hu
manity which this commercialized military oligarchy of Huerta
and his friends represent The killing of thousands in Mexico
City when Huerta treacherously overthrew Madero is only a
detail of this criminal system.
Mr. President, the remedy for this condition is not from
the top down; it is from the bottom up. Liberty, freedom,
and equal rights are not bestowed by the powerful few on the
many as an act of grace and justice, but are established by the
many by the ballot, or, where the ballot is denied, at the point o f
the sword. This was done at Runnymede, when the Magna
Charta was wrested from the hands o f John. This was done
in France, over a hundred years ago, when Louis X VI and Marie
Antoinette were dethroned. This was done by the American
colonists when we set up the Government of the United States.
The common people established liberty in France, in England,
and in the United States. And this will be done in Mexico at
the cannon’s mouth, by the armies of the common Mexican
people demanding the right o f life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness. My sympathies are with the common people of
Mexico. 1 want them to govern themselves, and I desire that
the United States shall give a friendly hand to those who seek
to establish constitutitnal government in Mexico.
They say that Gen. Francisco Villa, leading the constitution
alist armies, has been a horse thief, a bandit, a robber, a
killer o f men. It may be true, for Villa was only an igno
rant, unlearned peon, whose sister was ruined by a Cientifico.
Villa, I understand, when 18 years of age, killed the betrayer
of his sister, and took to the mountains to save his own life,
in a country where the rights of a peon were little better than
the rights o f a wolf. The hand of society was against Villa,
and Villa made war on society. But Villa, whatever his sins o f
the past, is now waging a humane warfare, as he has recently
learned it out of a volume given him by an American officer.
Villa, at all events, is now demanding the constitution and
reform. Villa, at all events, avows his friendship for the
United States and its wise policies. Villa, at all events, has
taken his own life in his hands and is leading thousands of
other common men in the demand for the overthrow of the
usurping despot, Huerta, for the overthrow o f the entire system
represented by Huerta of a commercialized, military oligarchy,
and the establishment o f constitutional government; and in
this enterprise I hope for the reestablishment of the constitu
tion and honest government, trusting and believing that neither
Villa nor Carranza, nor the men fighting with them, will ever
stand for the restoration in any other form o f the evil system
which they are gladly shedding their blood to terminate.
I wish to show that we are justified, not by our own griev
ances alone, but by the grievances of Englishmen, Germans,
Frenchmen, Spaniards, and above all, perhaps, by the griev
ances of the unhappy people of Mexico, whose liberties, whose
property rights, and whose lives have been, and are now. at
the mercy o f an armed military oligarchy, led by Huerta; that
no man’s life is safe in Mexico, that no man’s property is safe
44915— 13387
in Mexico, that no man, whether he be Mexican, American,
Englishman, German, Frenchman, or Spaniard, has any safety
in his life or his property under the criminal rule of this usurp
ing military despot, who has declared himself vested with leg
islative, judicial, and executive power over the people o f Mexico.
Until Diaz established his military control of Mexico and car
ried on a halfway benevolent commercial despotism there were
52 dictators, Presidents, and rulers in 59 years in Mexico. The
Encyclopedia Britannica on Mexico, describing the causes of
their difficulties, says that the—
C A U SE OF T H E
P R E S E N T R E V O L U T IO N I S T H E
T H E P EO PLE.
P R IV IL E G E D
C LA SSES V E R SU S
It says—
Thenceforward, till the second election of Porfirio Diaz to the presi
dency in 1884, the history of Mexico is one of almost continuous
warfare in which Maximilian’s empire is a mere episode. The conflicts,
which may at first sight seem to be merely between rival generals, are
seen upon closer examination to be mainly (1) between the privileged
classes, i. e., the church and (at times) the army, and the mass of the
other civilized population; (2) between Centralists and Federalists,
the former being identical with the army, the church, and the sup
porters of despotism, while the latter represent the desire for repub
licanism and local self-government.
On both sides in Mexico there was an element consisting of honest
doctrinaires; but rival military leaders exploited the struggles in their
ow interest, sometimes taking each side successively; and the insta
rn
bility was intensified by the extreme poverty of the peasantry, which
made the soldiery reluctant to return to civil life, by the absence of
a regular middle class, and by the concentration of wealth in a few
hands, so that a revolutionary chief was generally sure both of money
and of men. But after 1884, under the rule of Diaz, the Federal sys
tem continued in name, but it concealed in fact, with great benefit to
the nation, a highly centralized administration, very intelligent, and
on the whole both popular and successful—a modern form of rational
despotism.
Porfirio Diaz’s reign was “ popular and successful ” in a certain
narrow sense. It exploited the great riches of Mexico, it estab
lished many monopolies, it maintained order by killing those
who dared resist the unsound system, but it eventuated in the
only possible result of glorifying property accumulation and
making millionaires on the one hand and on the other hand iu
the result of reducing the mass of the people to abject poverty,
of preventing the mass o f the people being educated, of prevent
ing the mass of the people having a reasonable opportunity to
enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Diaz
regime or system magnified property rights at the expense of
and by minimizing human rights. The necessary results of the
Diaz system was his flight to avoid assassination and the suc
ceeding tragedies we have recently been witnessing.
The people of the United States are industrious and kindhearted, with high ideals of liberty and human brotherhood
and a resolute purpose not to interfere with the liberty of others
The great body of the people of the United States do not wish
to acquire the territory now occupied by the Mexican people
and do not wish to exercise any political authority over them
or their affairs.
All men know, Mr. President, that when nations become in
volved in the violent excitement o f war, when thousands of men
are killed on either side, and tens o f thousands are wounded,
and these terrible evils sending grief to homes in every section
are exaggerated, there spring up demands for indemnity and
reparation that would not be made in moments of more sober re
flection. If, therefore, the United States should be impelled by
- 44915—
13387
in Mexico, that no man, whether he be Mexican, American,
Englishman, German, Frenchman, or Spaniard, has any safety
in his life or his property under the criminal rule of this usurp
ing military despot, who has declared himself vested with leg
islative, judicial, and executive power over the people o f Mexico.
Until Diaz established his military control of Mexico and car
ried on a halfway benevolent commercial despotism there were
52 dictators, Presidents, and rulers in 59 years in Mexico. The
Encyclopedia Britannica on Mexico, describing the causes of
their difficulties, says that the—
C A U SE OF T H E
P R E S E N T R E V O L U T IO N I S T H E
T H E P EO PLE.
P R IV IL E G E D
C LA SSES V E R SU S
It says—
Thenceforward, till the second election of Porfirio Diaz to the presi
dency in 1884, the history of Mexico is one of almost continuous
warfare in which Maximilian’s empire is a mere episode. The conflicts,
which may at first sight seem to be merely between rival generals, are
seen upon closer examination to be mainly (1) between the privileged
classes, i. e., the church and (at times) the army, and the mass of the
other civilized population; (2) between Centralists and Federalists,
the former being identical with the army, the church, and the sup
porters of despotism, while the latter represent the desire for repub
licanism and local self-government.
On both sides in Mexico there was an element consisting of honest
doctrinaires; but rival military leaders exploited the struggles in their
ow interest, sometimes taking each side successively; and the insta
rn
bility was intensified by the extreme poverty of the peasantry, which
made the soldiery reluctant to return to civil life, by the absence of
a regular middle class, and by the concentration of wealth in a few
hands, so that a revolutionary chief was generally sure both of money
and of men. But after 1884, under the rule of Diaz, the Federal sys
tem continued in name, but it concealed in fact, with great benefit to
the nation, a highly centralized administration, very intelligent, and
on the whole both popular and successful—a modern form of rational
despotism.
Porfirio Diaz’s reign was “ popular and successful ” in a certain
narrow sense. It exploited the great riches o f Mexico, it estab
lished many monopolies, it maintained order by killing those
who dared resist the unsound system, but it eventuated in the
only possible result of glorifying property accumulation and
making millionaires on the one hand and on the other hand iu
the result o f reducing the mass of the people to abject poverty,
of preventing the mass o f the people being educated, of prevent
ing the mass of the people having a reasonable opportunity to
enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Diaz
regime or system magnified property rights at the expense of
and by minimizing human rights. The necessary results of the
Diaz system was his flight to avoid assassination and the suc
ceeding tragedies we have recently been witnessing.
The people o f the United States are industrious and kindhearted, with high ideals of liberty and human brotherhood
and a resolute purpose not to interfere with the liberty of others
The great body of the people of the United States do not wish
to acquire the territory now occupied by the Mexican people
and do not wish to exercise any political authority over them
or their affairs.
All men know, Mr. President, that when nations become in
volved in the violent excitement o f war, when thousands of men
are killed on either side, and tens o f thousands are wounded,
and these terrible evils sending grief to homes in every section
are exaggerated, there spring up demands for indemnity and
reparation that would not be made in moments of more sober re
flection. If, therefore, the United States should be impelled by
- 44915—
13387
8
the unhappy conditions in Mexico to intervene, we should, in
my opinion, declare to the world that we will not, under any
circumstances, take any of the territory now occupied by
Mexico.
We should do more than this— we should declare the true,
plain, honest motives which inspire the people o f the United
States in its present attitude. And these reasons should be
such as to fully justify the American Nation before the thought
ful opinion o f the people of other civilized nations.
The United States is already more than abundantly justified
In declaring armed intervention in Mexico, although the Presi
dent has not done more than he has deemed necessary to bring
about an adjustment with as little force and loss of life as pos
sible. I am glad that the authorities of Argentina, Brazil, and
Chile have been accepted as mediators between the United
States and the military oligarchy which has usurped the right
o f sovereignty of the Mexican people, although I am not willing
to appear to believe that any agreement with Huerta would
have any value whatever unless backed by a cannon or to appear
to believe he wishes an honorable adjustment.
It must be kept clearly in mind that our difficulty in Mexico
is not, in reality, whether or not Victoriano Huerta, who has
declared himself dictator at Mexico City, and who is at the
head of an organized army, pretending to represent the Mexican
people, shall fire 21 guns in salute to our flag. Our difficulty
lies much deeper than this.
Mexico, under the form of a Republic, established a liberal
constitution in 1853, an abstract of which I submit as Exhibit I.
It will be observed that this constitution, in Title I, Sec. I,
declares “ That in the Republic all are born free,” and yet the
Mexican people are enslaved by cruel commercial and political
monopoly, and peonage is found everywhere through Mexico.
No man is really free in Mexico.
This constitution declares that instruction is free, and yet
the great masses of the people have had no free instruction.
And all of the other assurances and guaranties of the constitu
tion have been gradually ignored until no man’s life or prop
erty is really safe in Mexico. Fifteen millions o f Mexicans
are substantially denied the right of life, liberty, and the pur
suit of happiness, and the bloodiest fratricidal strife has ensued
from this evil cause.
The coustitution, in Title I, Sec. I, guarantees the right of
petition, and yet when the House of Delegates of the Congress
o f the Republic of Mexico petitioned Huerta for protection of
the lives of the members of Congress, he immediately answered
this petition by arresting and throwing into the penitentiary
all the delegates who so petitioned—110 in number—on Octo
ber 9,1913.
Title I, section 1, article 13, provides that no one shall be tried
according to special laws, or by special tribunals, and yet this
military oligarchy had killed and imprisoned thousands, in
cluding American citizens and consuls, contrary to the consti
tution. In the prison of San Juan de Uluo, at Vera Cruz, our
officers found 325 Mexican men imprisoned without trial, with
out accusation, by the Huerta military despotism, merely be
cause they were unwilling to enlist as soldiers to support this
wicked power. All o f the personal guaranties have been ig
nored. Article 22 forbids mutilation, torture, yet the San Juan
44915— 13387
9
de Uluo furnishes overwhelming testimony of the violation of
this constitutional provision.
Article 23 declares the penalty of death abolished for po
litical offenses, except treason and murder in the first degree,
and yet President Madero, declared elected as the President of
the Republic of Mexico, and Vice President Suarez, elected
Vice President of the Republic of Mexico, were arrested, their
resignations commanded, under the threat o f immediate death,
and they were immediately killed, and a false account of the
killing published to the world, and no judicial investigation
ever held as promised to the diplomats representing all nations
of the world.
Title I, section 1, article 28, declares that there shall be no
monopolies o f any kind, whether governmental or private (in
ventions excepted), and yet for the last 40 years one monopo
listic concession after another has been granted, giving monop
olies innumerable to private persons—monopolies in agricul
tural lands, monopolies in grazing lands, monopolies in timber
lands, monopolies in oil lands— and it is an open secret that
the oil monopolies have given huge sums in substantial bribery
of the leading officials of the Mexican Government.
Monopoly has become so complete in Mexico that millions of
human beings, willing to labor, own no land upon which they
may labor. The same cruel and intolerable conditions of land
monopoly described by Thomas Jefferson as existing in France
immediately before the French Revolution exist in Mexico to
day, and make revolution absolutely unavoidable— make revolu
tion absolutely inextinguishable until this crime against human
life he corrected and the right of human beings to live shall be
recognized and provided. The demand of the Zapatistas is for
land upon which the peasantry can support life. These condi
tions have led to the war by Carranza, Villa, and the constitu
tionalists. This was the demand which Russia had to heed with
her peasantry—and from which was born “ Nihilism ” and “ An
archism.” It is the right o f land to live on that caused the
unending revolution of the Irish against their alien landlords
and the evil policy of government that tolerated and main
tained the system.
When all the land is held in the hands of the few, enabling
them to dictate the conditions of life upon the millions of
people who have no land, enabling them to dictate the political
conditions and to seize by force, by fraud, by artifice, and
craft the Government powers of the common people of Mexico,
and then to use the organized powers of the common people
against the common people themselves and against their inter
ests, chaos and rujn is the unavoidable consequence.
The people o f Mexico are enslaved, yet Title I, Section I,
article 39 declares that the sovereignty is in the people, that all
public power emanates from the people. And yet, the right of
sovereignty of 15,000.000 Mexican people is usurped by Huerta
and the military oligarchy that surrounds him. The sover
eignty of the people is supposed to be exercised through repre
sentatives honestly chosen in fair elections, yet the election on
the 26th o f October, 1913, was a mockery. Secret instructions
had been sent out from Mexico City to make a false return o f
the votes in favor o f Huerta and to make the returns defective
in order to throw the presidential office in the hands of the Con
gress elected as of that date, the preceding Congress being still
44915—13387----- 2
10
incarcerated in the penitentiary by Huerta’s order. I submit
the names of those still confined in the penitentiary November
15, 1913.
Members of the Mexican Congress put in the penitentiary
by Victoriano Huerta on October 10 for having dared to pass
a resolution to investigate the sudden disappearance of Senator
Dominguez, of Chiapas, and demanding safeguard o f their own
lives by Huerta and still incarcerated on November 13, 1913:
41. Sr. Manuel Antonio.
1. Sr. Guilleiuno Krauss.
42. Sr. Federico Oliveros.
2. Sr. Miguel Santa Cruz.
43. Sr. Faustino Gonzalez.
3. Sr. PrGspero A. Blanco.
44. Sr. JesGs Santilian.
4. Sr. Miguel Campuzano.
45. Sr. Martin Santiago.
5. Sr. Roberto M. Contreras.
46. Sr. Nicolas Basilio.
6. Sr. Salvador Rodriguez.
7. Sr. Juan Palomares Gonzfilez.
47. Sr. Francisco Tolentino.
48. Sr. Guadalupe Mendoza.
8. Sr. Mdnico Rangel.
49. Sr. Manuel Chavez.
9. Sr. Rosallo Anguiano.
50 Sr. Ram6n Pacheco.
10. Sr. Manuel S. Nfiiiez.
51. Sr. Modesto Pacheco.
11. Sr. Alberto Cravioto.
52. Sr. Vincente Canales.
12. Sr. Francisco Lazcano.
53. Sr. Rafael Pacheco.
13. Sr. Juan Urda Avendafio
54. Sr. Pedro Banos.
14. Sr. J. Luz Pena.
55. Sr. Jestis Bafios.
15. Sr. SalomG Torres.
56. Sr. Manuel Martinez, 1st.
16. Sr. Santos Ramirez.
57. Sr. Manuel Martinez, 2d.
17. Sr. Maximiano Galeana
18. Sr. German Malpica
58. Sr. Arcadio Martinez.
59. Sr. Josti Soto.
19. Sr. Ellas Sedano.
20. Sr. Severino Reyes.
60. Sr. Juan San Agustln.
21. Sr. Juan Rosas.
61. Sr. Manual San Agustln.
22. Sr. Jos<5 Antero Garcia.
62. Sr. Rosario Iluerta.
23. Sr. Fernando Erquiaga.
63. Sr. Librado Heredia.
24. Sr. Tadeo Gbmez.
64. Sr. J. Angel Gonzalez.
25. Sr. Antonio Rodriguez Ortiz
65. Sr. Dionisio CarriOn.
26. Sr. Ponciano Ramirez.
66. Sr. Alfonso Castaneda.
27. Sr. Rfimulo Carpio
67. Sr. Adolfo Osorno.
28. Sr. Miguel Millan.
68. Sr. Miguel M. Torres.
29. Sr. David Vallejo.
69. Sr. Liborio Torres.
30. Sr. Antolln Mendtzaba!
70. Sr. Francisco Pineda Rub£n.
31. Sr. Angel Loera.
71. Sr. Francisco Lu (Chino, in32. Sr. Josd Loera.
vaiido de una pierna).
33. Sr. Florentino I. L6pez
72. Sr. Jestis Pulido Cfivares (in34. Sr. Juan Barrera.
vaiido de las dos piernas).
35. Sr. Nazario Arredondo.
73. Sr. Gabriel Martinez.
36. Sr. Teodomiro Hernandez
74. Sr. Angel Silva.
37. Sr. Manuel Cabrera.
75. Sr. Cosine Davila.
38. Sr. TGofilo Velazquez.
76. Sr. Margarito Balderas.
39. Sr. Pablo Bello.
77. Sr. Fausto Herrero.
40. Sr. Ignacio Garcia.
78. Sr. Salvador Acosta.
Many of these men were still in the penitentiary when the
United States seized Vera Cruz April 20, 1914.
By Title I, section 3, foreigners have the same guaranties of
life, liberty, and the possession of property. Yet large num
bers of foreigners have been killed without any adjustment or
diplomatic settlement being made, and hundreds o f millions of
property belonging to foreigners have been impaired, de
stroyed, or taken without compensation.
*
All nations should be patient with another nation torn by
civil strife, and where the constituted authorities are doing
what they can to establish order and justice; but Huerta’s
own evil conduct is the cause of these disorders in Mexico.
The constitution o f Mexico divides the powers of government
into legislative, executive, and judicial, yet Huerta, on the
10th o f October, 1913, destroyed the legislative branch and
threw the Congress in the penitentiary by military force, in
vested himself by decree with legislative power and with
judicial power, in open and flagrant violation of the constitu
tion which he had sworn to support.
44915— 13387
11
Mr. President, Mexico is upon our immediate borders; our
boundary line touches Mexico for near 2.000 miles.
Upon the invitation of the constitution of Mexico, very many
thousands of our citizens, who are entitled to the protection
of this Government, entered Mexico and invested hundreds of
millions of property. Their property has been despoiled, their
lives have been taken without redress, and now they are
all fleeing or fled from Mexico for the purpose of saving life
itself and we, responsible to them and for them before the
whole world, with abundant power to protect them, stand face
to face with a military despot whose conduct has made their
flight imperative, but whose conduct against them and against
us is a mild offense compared to his crime against the com
mon people of Mexico, whose Government, such as it was, he
overthrew by military force and usurped on the 18tli of Feb
ruary, 1913.
We all remember, Mr. President, his boastful telegram to
President Taft, February 19, 1913, that he had overthrown the
Mexican Government.
Huerta has been trying to unite behind himself all the revo
lutionary forces of Mexico, and in order to accomplish that, he
has been trying to force the United States to an invasion of
Mexico. He was openly charged with this on the floor of the
Mexican Senate by Senator Dominguez, senator from Chiapas,
on the 23d of September, 1913. He wished to cause interven
tion in a form sufficiently mild that he could use the invasion
as an appeal to the patriotism of the Mexican military leaders
of all revolutionary factions and secure their cooperation with
out having intervention go so far as to capture Mexico City
and compel a restoration of order and the reestablishment of
the power of the common people of Mexico in the exercise of
their acknowledged constitutional sovereignty. He would, how
ever, much prefer being a prisoner of the United States than
being prisoner of Villa or Zapata, both o f whom have sworn
his death for treason.
Mr. President, the United States would be justified in inter
vening for the purpose o f protecting the rights of life and
property of American citizens in Mexico. The United States
would be justified in protecting the rights of Englishmen, Ger
mans, Frenchmen, and Spaniards, whose Governments look to
us for their protection. The United States would be justified,
in order to end the bloody fratricidal strife and restore order
and peace and constitutional government on our border.
Mr. President, the United States has borne repeated injuries
week after week, month after month, and year after year await
ing diplomatic adjustment, until at last, in lieu of adjusting
these immediate grievances which are of record in our Depart
ment of State and which 1 shall not pause to enumerate as they
would fill a volume of themselves, it finally comes to the point
where Huerta, with growing indifference and contempt for the
rights of the American people, and in view o f saving his own
life by forced American intervention, permits— if he did not
instigate— an international insult to the flag and uniform of the
United States, and then refused redress under the rules of
international law.
The world should understand that while the United States
regards the insult to its flag and uniform with great gravity
and is justified in demanding proper amends for this open
44915—13387
12
affront and indignity before the eyes of the world, neverthe
less beyond the flag incident is a long series of grievances which
the United States has been trying in vain to adjust by diplo
matic process. And the world should understand further that
the killing o f our citizens in Mexico, the destruction of the
property of our citizens in Mexico, the killing of Germans and
Englishmen and Spaniards in Mexico, and the destruction of
their property, for whose adjustment the United States is held
morally responsible and for which the United States has anx
iously desired a settlement as the nearest friend o f the people of
Mexico, are all factors in determining the attitude of the people
of the United States.
The world should remember that this multitude of individual
grievances, which has been impossible of adjustment, is due to
an unstable condition of government in Mexico; that the
unhappy people of Mexico, judged by their own constitution,
have no government; that all constitutional guaranties in the
country under the military control of Huerta have been over
thrown; that the constitution of Mexico has been tranmpled in
the dust by military power, by treason, by murder; and that
the instances of which we complain—of the murder of our citi
zens and of the citizens of other nations and the destruction of
their property—will be indefinitely continued until a stable form
o f government is established in Mexico. The whole civilized
world has a right to complain at the ruinous slavery imposed
upon the people o f Mexico by the monopolies which have in
vaded Mexico in defiance of the constitution of Mexico—monop
olies in land, minerals, timber, water powers, government sup
plies, down to monopolies in gambling and female prostitution—
granted to a favored few who by bribery and corruption have
secured these favors from the dishonest officials who have mis
governed Mexico under the form o f a Republic but in sober truth
as a commercialized military oligarchy during the last 40 years.
This criminal oligarchy has not been content with establish
ing a monopoly of all the opportunities of making a living by
the labor of men—it has not been content with the commercial
slavery of the people of Mexico and reducing them to peonage,
but through the commercial and financial power they have
established a corrupt political monopoly o f the governing
powers which they have concentrated in Mexico City. The
power of the sovereign States of Mexico has been invaded, so
that Huerta, as the President of Mexico, has not hesitated to
set aside governors elected by the people and in their places
put military governors. And while title 3 declares the su
preme power of the federation as divided for its exercise into
legislative, executive, and judicial, and that never can two or
more of these powers be united in one person or corporation,
nor the legislative power be vested in one individual, Huerta,
by his own decree o f October 10, 1913, vested in his one person
legislative, executive, and judicial power in flat violation o f the
constitution of the people of Mexico.
Mr. President, the real basis o f all the difficulties in Mexico
is the stealing from the people of Mexico their constitutional
rights and retaining the stolen goods by military force. The
real difficulty in Mexico is the usurpation of the power o f the
common people o f Mexico by a military oligarchy, pretending
to represent the people. Under such conditions there is the
absolute certainty that no change from one dictator to another
44915— 13387
13
dictator will provide any true remedy so long as the head of
this military group, whether Porfirio Diaz. De la Barra, Madero,
Lascurain (who was president for a few minutes), or Huerta
or the next successful general belonging to Huerta’s group who
arrests him and puts him to death will cure the evil in Mexico.
The real remedy required in Mexico is to restore to the hands
of the people of Mexico their right of self-government, to de
mand a secret, honest election system, decentralization of power,
restoration to the several States of Mexico of the right to man
age their own business in their own way under the constitution
of Mexico. A constitutional convention is necessary in Mexico
to decentralize its powers and to enable the people to exercise
safeguarded self-government and to abolish by law the mo
nopolies which have reduced to abject poverty 15.000,000
Mexicans and given stupendous wealth to a few thousand
families in Mexico.
I have the faith to believe that the people of Mexico will pass
the proper laws for their own protection and for the overthrow
of monopoly if they are given an opportunity and that they will
establish laws based upon economic and political justice, just
as the people of France did.
It was the fisbwomen of France, it was the peasantry of
France, it was the uneducated, unlearned, common herd in
France, despised by the nobility of France, who sang the
Marseillaise in the streets of Paris, and who deposed Louis
and Marie Antoinette and established in France a Government
that recognized the great principles o f the French Revolu
tion— liberty, equality, fraternity; and the same spirit is in
Mexico now. These people are willing to lay down their lives
for liberty, and they are sacrificing their lives wholesale, and
they must not be despised,
I know that there have been those who. observing the mili
tary despotism that has been parading in Mexico as a Re
public, Insist that the people of that country are ignorant
and unpatriotic, but I have no fears for the people of Mexico.
But, Mr. President, I remind you and I remind the Senate
that this commercialized military oligarchy made every effort
to establish an alliance with Japan at a time when we were
having difficulty with Japan over the California case. Such
an alliance would bring in its train the most serious conse
quences for the United States. To permit on our borders such
an irresponsible Government as that o f Huerta, controlled
merely by corrupt avarice and ambition, cairies with it danger
to the welfare of the people of the United States far greater
than the danger involved in now throwing Huerta out of power
in Mexico. Have we forgotten his invitation to the officers
of the Japanese vessel Idzuma, his week of feasting and osten
tatious demonstration of excessive affection for the Japanese,
at a time when he was stirring the passion and prejudice of
the populace of Mexico against the American people?
When the people of Mexico really govern Mexico, under con
stitutional safeguards, just as our people in the 48 States
govern their affairs, there will be no danger whatever from the
Mexican Government. They will be our friends, knowing that
we are in truth the friends of the Mexican i>eople. Moreover,
in intervening in Mexico for the establishment o f peace, for the
pacification o f that unhappy country, for the restoration of
order, for the reestablishment of liberty and for that purpose
41915—13:187
u
alone; when we declare to the people o f the whole world that
we have no de.sire to acquire any part o f the territory of
Mexico, that we do not wish to govern them, but only wish that
they shall have the right in peace, in honor, in dignity, to
govern themselves, by choosing their own officials in safe
guarded, honest elections, we will do more than make a lasting
friend o f the people of Mexico; we will give the most satisfy
ing assurances to all of the South American Republics of the
uprightness of our purposes. We will thus assure every coun
try on the Western Hemisphere that we are moved alone by
purposes of unselfish humanity; we will set the standard before
the whole world o f a high purpose to maintain the right of
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and to promote the
great principle o f the brotherhood of man.
Our great Republic is founded on the ideal of human liberty,
on the idea of freedom.
Over the magnificent entrance of Union Station in our Capi
tal, where tens o f thousands pass, is inscribed in granite this
noble sentiment:
Sweetener of hut and of hall,
Brlnger of life out of naught,
Freedom, oh ! fairest of all
The daughters of time and of thought.
On our gold and silver coins, from 1795 to this day, we have
stamped the word “ liberty,” and the Goddess of Liberty and
the liberty cap and the crowned head of liberty. Our Consti
tution bristles with it, and every State and every county and
every city and every town and every village and church and
every school and home teaches it as the foundation of human
safety and happiness and progress. It is the ideal of the
Western Hemisphere. On all the coins of the Argentine Repub
lic, of Chile, of Colombia, of Ecuador, o f Peru, of Uruguay, of
Venezuela, of Bolivia, of Honduras and Guatemala, and Mexico
“ liberty,” in some form, is stamped upon the coins and carried
in the pockets of the common people and is cherished in their
hearts as the highest ideal o f the great Western Hemisphere.
Brazil freed her slaves without bloodshed before 1860 be
cause of the love of her people for liberty.
The people of the Argentine Republic and of Chile erected
a statue of Christ, the Prince o f Peace, on their joint border
line as a lasting memorial of the peace and brotherhood o f the
people of the two Republics. This statue, unveiled March 13.
1904, was cast out of bronze from old cannon belonging to the
two countries.
The great liberty bell that sounded the cry of liberty on July
4. 1776, recast in 1753 in Philadelphia, bears the prophetic
w ords:
PROCLAIM LIBERTY THROUGH OCT ALL T H E LAND TO ALL THE IN H A BITA NTS
THEREOF.
A hundred years later, in 1886, the people o f France who love
liberty and who established liberty in France by the French
Revolution, presented to the i>eople of the United States the
magnificent statue of “ Liberty enlightening the world,” which
our people erected on a giant granite pedestal, where it holds
out at the entrance of New York Harbor a blazing torch over
300 feet high, where all the world shall see and do honor to
“ liberty.”
44915— 13387
Mr. President, the ideals o f all the western hemisphere have
been torn down by Huerta and the corrupt commercial forces
behind him which created him and of which he is a mere in
strumentality. He symbolizes corrupt commercialism, monop
oly, concessions unearned, using the property and powers of
the common people not for their betterment but to their ruin
and the death of liberty.
The conditions in Mexico are absolutely unendurable. Our
national principles and our national safety are endangered.
The welfare of all the North and South American countries
would be jeopardized unless liberty and freedom shall be re
stored to the people of Mexico under constitutional safeguards.
The long triumph of bribery and corruption and military
force over the judicial, the legislative, and the executive powers
of the unhappy people of Mexico has finally led directly to
open treason and the overthrow of even the forms of constitutinal government and iias led to the establishment of an irre
sponsible military oligarchy and despotism. Men of great
intelligence have been led by avarice and greed and ambition
through corrupt processes to monopolize and commercialize the
political powers of the people of Mexico through a group of un
wise and short-sighted Mexican leaders who have been willing
to see the governing powers of the people of Mexico fraudu
lently controlled and the great values of the lands of Mexico
diverted to private hands through monopoly.
Military despotism is now in control of Mexico, with all con
stitutional guaranties overthrown.
If military revolution is permitted by treason and murder to
usurp the governing powers of the people o f Mexico, if freedom
is thus destroyed by monopoly in Mexico, if liberty is thus slain
before our very eyes that avarice and greed may rule the land
through a military despotism, overthrowing the civil law. then,
Mr. President, the whole of America is in peril.
Powers similar to and to some extent the same that have cor
rupted Mexico and destroyed constitutional government are
busy in Colombia, in Venezuela, and in some of the other Re
publics of North and South America, and the establishment of a
military, commercial despotism in Mexico, if successful, would
constitute a precedent, the danger of which should not be
ignored.
I congratulate the world that neither the United States, nor
Argentina, nor Brazil, nor Chile recognize the military despot
who, by treason, seized the governing power o f the people of
Mexico and by fraud has retained it.
It is well known that the Government of Porfirio Diaz was a
military despotism under the color o f a Republic, yet, in the
main, was conducted apparently with a view to developing the
resources of Mexico and of protecting life, at least where sub
mission was rendered to his Government.
Finally, the conditions developed by Porfirio Diaz in estab
lishing innumerable monopolies throughout Mexico by conces
sion of various kinds led to a state o f unrest and a dangerous
revolutionary sentiment that made it necessary for him to leave
Mexico and live in Europe. His conduct was practical flight
from imminent danger o f revolutionary assassination.
He left his successor ad interim— De la Barra—and Madero
was elected as an avowed progressive candidate, professing, at
44915— 13387
l
r
t
10
least, the patriotic purpose of reform. He was elected through
the defective electoral machinery of Mexico, but his weak Gov
ernment was soon overthrown by the old commercial oligarchy
and its secret allies and sympathizers by mutiny and con
spiracy.
On February 9, 1913, at I o'clock in the morning, Felix Diaz,
who had procured a mutiny among the troops of Madero,
escaited, by collusion, from the penitentiary and immediately
organized an assault on Madero’s Government, with the coop
eration of several thousand o f Madero’s troops. Gen. Huerta
was in charge of Madero’s troops at the palace, and Gen.
Blanquet, at present the right-hand man of Gen. Huerta, was
next in importance of Madero s generals. The loyalty of both
Huerta and Blanquet was already questioned.
De la Barra and Huerta were, on February 10, already in
consultation for the purpose of effecting some arrangement, and
Diaz was quoted on February 10 as hoping for a good issue
from the negotiations being carried on with Gen. Huerta.
Blanquet's troops deserted to Diaz. Huerta carried on warfare
with Diaz by day and was having secret conferences with his
representatives by night.
Finally, on February 17, Huerta stated that the plans were
fully matured to remove Madero. Blanquet’ s guns were turned
toward Chapultepec. Blanquet’s troops were put in charge of
the National Palace, and the troops friendly to Madero were
put outside of the palace by Huerta, Madero’ s commanding
general.
On February 18, at 2 p. m., Huerta, the sworn commander of
Madero’s troops, had Blanquet arrest his chief, the elected
President o f the Republic, Madero. and the Vice President,
Suarez, and the entire Cabinet. At the same time Gustavo
Madero, the brother o f the President, was arrested and imme
diately afterwards killed.
On February 15, Pedro Lascurain, secretary of foreign rela
tions, appeared iu the ball of the committees o f the Chamber
of Deputies of the Congress o f Mexico and falsely represented
that the American ambassador had expressed Us positive
opinion that 3,000 United States marines would immediately
come to the City of Mexico to protect the lives and interests of
Americans as well as other foreigners residing there.
This was doue iu order to force Madero’s resignation, but
Madero refused to resign. The following action was taken in
the Mexican Senate:
(Appendix No. 1.)
S p e c i a l S e s s i o n H e l d F e b r u a r y 15, 1913, i n t h e H a l l
o f t h e C h a m b e r o f D e p u t ie s .
S enator J uan C. F
s id in g .
of
Com
m it t e e s
ern an dez,
P re
* * * Upon the reading of the inserted dispatch being finished,
Mr Pedro I.ascurain. secretary of foreign relations, appeared and was
granted the floor for the purpose of reporting. Mr. I^ascurain stated
that the international situation of Mexico was extremely critical with
respect to the United States of America, for telegrams hare been re
ceded from Washington conveying the decision of that Government,
already being carried out, to send war ships to Mexico territorial waters
of the Gulf and of the Pacific, and transports with landing troops.
The secretary of foreign relations added that, at 1 o'clock a. m. to
day, the United States ambassador had convened in the quarters of
the embassy some members of the diplomatic corps to whom he made
known the impending arrival of the ships, and his firm and positive
opinion that 3,000 marines would come to the city of Mexico In order
44915— 13387
17
(o protect the lives and interests of Americans as well as of other
foreigners residing therein.
Juan C. F e r n a n d e z , P resid in g S en a tor.
R i c a r d o R. G u z m a n , S en a to r and S ec reta ry.
Jose
M
e x ic o
,
C a s t e l l o t , S en a to r and
S ec reta ry.
F eb ru a ry 15. 191S.
When Huerta arrested the President of Mexico, Madero, he
immediately gave out a notice to the Mexican people that he had
assumed the executive power, and that he was holding under
arrest “ Mr. Francisco I. Madero and his Cabinet,” as follows:
N O TICE.
In view of the most difficult circumstances through which the nation
Is passing, and particularly in recent days, the capital of the Republic,
which, through the work of the defective government of Mr. Madero,
may well be characterized as being in an almost anarchical situation,
I have assumed the executive power and, pending the immediate con
vening of the Chambers of the Union, In order to pass upon this present
political situation, I am holding under arrest in the National Palace Mr.
Francisco I. Madero and his Cabinet, in order that as soon as this
point is decided and in an effort to reconcile people's minds during the
present historical moments we may all work in behalf of peace, which
Is a matter of life or death to the entire nation.
Given in the palace of the Executive, on February 18. 1913.
V.
H
uerta
,
M ilita r y Com m a ndin g G eneral
in cha rge o f th e E x e c u t iv e P o w er .
At 9.30, February 18, Huerta and Felix Diaz met at the Amer
ican Embassy, where the American ambassador cooperated in
having them reach an understanding to work together, upon the
basis that Huerta should he the provisional President of the
Republic, and that Diaz should name the Cabinet, and that
thereafter Diaz should have the support of Huerta in being
elected as the permanent President. Their agreement was re
duced to writing, as follow s:
In the city of Mexico, at 9.30 p. m.. of February 18, 1913, Gens.
Felix Diaz and Victoriano Huerta met together, the former being
assisted by Attorneys Fidencio Hernandez and Rodolfo Reyes and the
latter by Lieut. Col. Joaquin Maas and Engineer Enrique Zepeda ; and
Gen. Huerta stated that, inasmuch as the situation of Mr. Madero’s
government was unsustainable, and in order to avoid further bloodshed
and out of feelings of national fraternity, he had made prisoners of
said gentleman, his cabinet, and other persons, and that he wished to
express his good wishes to Gen. Diaz to the effect that the elements
represented by him might fraternize and. all united, save the present
distressful situation. Gen. Diaz stated that his movements had had
no other object than to serve the national welfare, and that accordingly
he was ready to make any sacrifice which might redound to the ben
efit of the country.
After discussions bad taken place on the subject among all those
present, as mentioned above, the following was agreed upon :
First. From this time on the executive power which held sway is
deemed not to exist and is not recognized, the elements represented by
Gens. Diaz and Huerta pledging themselves to prevent by all means
any attempt to restore said power.
Second. Endeavor will be made as soon as possible to adjust the
existing situation under the best possible legal conditions, and Gens.
Diaz and Huerta will make every effort to the end that the latter may
within 72 hours assume the provisional presidency of the Republic, with
the following cabinet:
Foreign relations : Lie. Francisco L. de la Barra.
Treasury: Toriblo Esquival Obregon.
War : Gen. Manuel Mondragon.
Fomento: Eng. Alberto Garcia Granados.
Justice: Lie. Rodolfo Reyes.
Public instruction : Lie. J. Vera Estaiiol.
Communications: Eng. David de la Fuente.
There shall be created a new ministry, to be charged specially with
solving the agrarian problem and matters connected therewith, being
called the ministry of agriculture, and the portfolio thereof being in
trusted to Lie. Manuel Garza Adalpe. Any modifications which may
44915—13387------3
18
for any reason be decided upon in this cabinet slate shall take place In
the same manner in which the slate itself was made up.
Third. While the legal situation is being determined and settled
Gens. Huerta and Diaz are placed in charge of all elements and author
ities of every kind, the exercise whereof may be necessary in order to
afford guaranties.
Fourth. Gen. Felix Diaz declines the offer to form part of the pro
visional cabinet in case Gen. Huerta assumes the Provisional Presi
dency, in order that he may remain at liberty to undertake his work
along the lines of his compromises with his party at the coming elec
tion. which purpose he wishes to express clearly and which is fully
understood by the signers.
Fifth. Official notice shall immediately be given to the foreign rep
resentatives, it being confined to stating to them that the executive
power has ceased ; that provision is being made for a legal substitute
therefor; that meantime the full authority thereof is vested in Gens.
Diaz and Huerta; and that all proper guaranties will be afforded to
their respective countrymen.
Sixth. All revolutionists shall at once be invited to cease their
hostile movements, endeavor being made to reach the necessary set
tlements.
Gen. V i c t o r i a x o H u e r t a .
Gen. F e l i x D i a z .
As soon as this agreement was reached, Huerto and Diaz
issued the following joint proclamation:
[From Mexican Herald.]
J O IN T
PR O C L A M A T IO N .
To th e M ex ica n p eo p le.
The unendurable and distressing situation through which the capi
tal of the Republic has passed obliged the army, represented by the
undersigned, to unite in a sentiment of fraternity to achieve the
salvation of the country. In consequence the nation may be at rest;
all liberties compatible with order are assured under the responsi
bility of the undersigned chiefs, who at once assumed command and
administration in so far as is necessary to afford full guarantees to
nationals and foreigners, promising that within 72 hours the legal
situation will have been duly organized. The army invites the
people, on whom it relies, to continue in the noble attitude of respect
and moderation which it lias hitherto observed; it also invites all
revolutionary factions to unite for the consolidation of national peace.
Mexico, February 18, 1913.
V. H lerta.
F e l ix D ia z .
The legislature of the sovereign State of Coahuila, on Feb
ruary 19, the very next day, denounced Huerta’s usurpation
and directed Gov. Carranza to use the armed forces o f the
State in supporting Madero as the constitutional president.
On March 24 the Legislature of Sonora denounced the
usurpation o f Huerta, and thereafter in succession 10 of the
elected governors of the States of Mexico joined the revolution.
It is interesting to observe what became of the various gover
nors of the various States o f Mexico under Huerta’s usurpation.
The following 10 governors were replaced by military governors
and all joined the revolution:
Gov. Felipe Riveros, of Sinaloa; Gov. Venus Tiano Carranza,
o f Coahuila; Gov. Jose M. Maytorena. o f Sonora; Gov. Alberto
Fuentes, of the State of Aguascalientes; Gov. Miguel Silva, of
Michoacan; Gov. Ramon Rosales, of the State o f Hidalgo; Gov.
Inocecio Lugo, of the State o f Guerrero; Gov. J. Castillo Brito,
o f the State of Campeche; Gov. A. Camara Vales, of the State
o f Yucatan; Gov. Matias Guera, of the State of Tamaulipas;
Abraham Gonzalez, governor of Chihuahua, was murdered by
Rabago, a major general under Huerta, by tying the governor on
the railroad track and slowly backing a yard engine over him
to give him a proper realization of the horror of death; Gov.
De la Barra went abroad to Paris, France; and Gov. Rafael
44915—13387
19
Zapeda, o f the State of San Luis Potosi, and Gov. Trinidad
Alamillo, of the State of Colima, and Gov. Patricio Leyva, of the
State of Morelos, were thrown in prison. Gov. Bibiano Villareal, of Neuva Leon, fled the country and went to New York.
Gov. Carlos Potani, o f the State of Durango, fled the country
and went to San Antonio, Tex. Six of the other governors went
to Mexico City, and the governor of Puebla and Tlilaxcala and
Queretaro were the only ones who remained at home out o f
28 governors elected by the people.
On February 19, 1913, under the duress of the fear o f death
and on the promise of the safeguard o f their lives, the Presi
dent and Vice President of Mexico signed the following resig
nation :
In view of the events which have occurred since yesterday in the
nation and for its greater tranquility, we formally resign our positions
of President and Vice President, respectively, to which we were elected.
We protest whatever may be necessary.
F r a n c i s c o I. M a d e r o .
J
M
e x ic o
C
it y
,
ose
M. P
in o
S u arez.
F eb ru a ry 19, 1913.
I am informed that this resignation was obtained from Presi
dent Madero and Vice President Suarez under the fear of
instant death, but was signed by them upon the agreed condition
that it should be held by the minister from Chile, a friend of
Madero, in escro, until President Madero and Vice President
Suarez could And safe asylum on a foreign warship. The agree
ment was broken, the resignation used as a basis of having
Lascurain, minister of foreign relations under Madero, pro
claimed provisional President. He took the oath of office and
did not appoint a secretary of foreign relations, but he did
appoint Victoriano Huerta secretary o f gobernacion. Huerta
took the oath as secretary o f gobernacion. and Lascurain imme
diately resigned as provisional President, thus devolving the
presidency upon Huerta as next in line, and he took the oath of
office before Congress as President o f the Republic. These
simultaneous acts, of course—the resignations of the President
and Vice President, procured by military force and duress, the
resignation o f Lascurain under the same force— can not be re
garded as a legitimate conduct of public affairs, the entire pro
cedure being void, as treason against the people of Mexico,
punishable with death under the constitution and laws of
Mexico.
On Saturday, February 22—Washington’s birthday— Huerta,
as President, had the deposed President Madero and Vice Presi
dent Suarez transferred from the National Palace, not to a war
ship. where they might escape with their lives, but to the peni
tentiary in Mexico City. At 10 o’clock Huerta is alleged to
have changed the commandante of the penitentiary, and at 11
o’clock Madero and Suarez were killed.
On February 24, 1913, the new minister o f foreign relations,
de la Barra, made a report to the members of the diplomatic
corps, giving an account of the death of President Madero and
Vice President Suarez, and promising the fullest judicial inves
tigation, and that minutes of all proceedings should be furnished
the diplomatic representatives of the foreign powers, it being
commonly believed that Huerta had had these men assassinated,
as was afterwards openly charged against Huerta on September
23, 1913, in the Mexican Senate by Senator Dominguez, of
Chiapas.
41915— 1:5387
20
The minutes o f the judicial investigation have never been
furnished, and the United States has no adequate official in
formation except the statement of Huerta made to De la Barra
and Senor Garcia 11.30 Saturday night that as Madero and
Suarez were being conveyed in an automobile to the peniten
tiary they were killed in an exchange of shots between the
escort in whose custody they were held and a group of indi
viduals unknown who had attempted to rescue them.
Huerta had assured Madero and Suarez their safety before
using their resignations. He was responsible for their safe
guard. Huerta also fully advised, because Madero’s mother
and Suarez’s wife had gone to Ambassador Wilson and prayed
him to intercede with Huerta to spare the life of Madero and
Suarez and to allow them to go to Europe, stating “ that this
was the expressed condition attached to their resignation," and
Ambassador Wilson made the appeal to Huerta.
I am informed that De la Barra advised Huerta that unless
he were satisfied the murder of Madero was not at the conniv
ance of the Government he would immediately resign with two
of his colleagues.
It is interesting to see what became of this cabinet, ar
ranged in the pact between Huerta and Diaz and whose mem
bers had been named by Diaz.
Of this cabinet named by Felix Diaz under the pact, the Sec
retary of Foreign Affairs, De la Barra, is in France, the Sec
retary of Finance, Obregon, is a general in the Constitutional
Army making war on Huerta, and recently refused to consider
cooperating with the Federal troops against the United States;
Rudolph Reyes, of the Department of Justice, has been killed;
the Secretary o f Public Instruction, Estannol, has fled to the
United States; the Secretary of Communications. De la Fuente,
has gone abroad; the Minister of Agriculture. Alvarpe, has re
signed; and the Secretary of Fomento, Alberto Gill; the Sec
retary o f Interior, Alberto Gienodes; are out of the cabinet and
gone.
Felix Diaz, who made the pact with Huerta, fled from Mexico
for fear of assassination by Huerta’s orders.
The American ambassador. Wilson, made a strenuous effort
to have Huerta recognized. As dean of the diplomatic corps, he
made a speech o f congratulation to Huerta upon his accession
to the presidency. He urged our State Department to recognize
Huerta. Pie instructed all American consuls to do everything
possible to bring about a general acceptance of Huerta, and
advised them that Huerta would be immediately recognized by
all foreign Governments. On February 24 Ambassador Wilson
advised the Government that the Madero incident had pro
duced no effect upon the public mind and that Consul Holland
had telegraphed that Huerta’s government refused to accept
the adhesion o f Gov. Carranza, of Coahuila; was sending
troops against him. and that Carranza had evacuated his capital.
When the secretary o f the British legation expressed the
opinion that his Government would not recognize Huerta on
account of the murder of Madero, Ambassador Wilson ex
pressed the opinion that it would be a great error, endangering
Huerta’s government, upon the safety o f which all foreigners
depended. Our ambassador expressed the opinion that Huerta’s
government was not privy to the murder o f Madero and Suarez,
and that either the occurrence was as stated, or that the death
44915—13387
21
of Madero and Suarez was due to a subordinate military con
spiracy, and be was of the opinion also that the murder of
Madero and Suarez, as two Mexicans relegated to private life
by their resignations, should arouse no greater expressions of
popular disapproval in the United States than the murder,
unrequited by justice, of some 75 or 80 Americans in Mexico
during the preceding two years.
Our ambassador ceased to be an acceptable medium of com
munication between President Wilson and the authorities of
Mexico, and for this reason his resignation was accepted.
Huerta’s usurpation of the governing powers of the people
of Mexico, his military revolution, overthrowing the Presi
dent and Vice President o f Mexico and bringing about the im
mediate death of these officers elected by the Mexican people,
was not approved by a large part of the people of Mexico, who,
however, were, for the most part, intimidated by the military
power of Huerta and by the bloodthirsty disposition shown by
him and by his military clique. Huerta is the product of his
environment. He had, since his boyhood, been the witness of
the killing by military order of citizens who proved obnoxious
to the government of Porfirio Diaz. I have no doubt that
Huerta regards such conduct as entirely justifiable. There are
those in the United States in sympathy with Huerta and his
military commercial despotism controlling Mexico, who say
that no other kind o f government is possible in Mexico except
a military despotism.
Against this cruel, unwise, unjust conception, I enter my
solemn protest, and I declare it to be my profound belief that
the people o f Mexico are, in the main, an industrious, worthy,
honest, good-hearted people, who would like to be at peace with
the world, and who would rejoice in a stable government under
constitutional guaranties, and that they have abundant intelli
gence to carry it out if they can be freed from the despotism now
in control of their government.
No man. who has observed the sacrifices which are being
made by the people of Mexico in trying to restore constitutional
government, should deny their attachment to liberty and the
constitutional law.
No man, who looks at the record of the elected governors of
the states of Mexico, who might have bought their peace by
subserviency of Huerta, who witnessed the brave and upright
conduct o f the Mexican congressmen imprisoned by Huerta, the
brave conduct of Senator Dominguez in speaking the truth at
the cost of life and the enormous sacrifices now being made by
the Mexicans on the field of battle, should doubt the attitude of
the i>eople of Mexico. The people of Mexico have in them the
Divine spark, they have been taught the Christian virtues and
they have the same natural affections and passions as other
people o f like blood. They have had no fair chance.
Mr. President, the governors of Mexico were not the only
ones to express their hostility, to the active usurpation by
Huerta. Various members of Congress in Mexico expressed
their disapproval of Huerta’s conduct, and representing, as they
did, the people o f Mexico, and even more particularly those
who were the beneficiaries of the monopolistic system of Mexico,
nevertheless showed were not willing to have the constitutional
guaranties overthrown. The cruelty and unlawful violence of
the government of Huerta was shown by the methods pursued
44915— 13387
against them. A few instances of which I think should be
enumerated.
For instance, a member of Congress, Serapia Arendon, hav
ing expressed his lack of sympathy with the Huerta regime,
was warned in several ways that his life was in great jeop
ardy, and on the night of the 22d of August, 1913, he was sud
denly seized, rushed in an automobile to the Thanepantla Bar
racks, where some shots were heard, and he has never been
seen since.
The condition being intolerable, a member of the Senate of
Mexico, Senator Belisariyo Domingues, representing the State
of Chiapas, finally made up his mind to do his duty by de
nouncing this usurpation and treason, knowing that it would
cost him his life. It is reported that lie made his will, bade his
family farewell, and on the 23d of September delivered in
writing a speech in the Senate of Mexico. The president of
the Senate refused to allow his speech to be delivered, but could
not prevent its being made a part o f the record.
I shall read that speech:
S ep t. 23, 1913. A d d ress o f B eiisa rio D o m in q u ez, S en a to r fro m th e S o v
er eig n S ta te o f C hiapas to th e S en a te o f th e R ep u b lic o f M ex ico .
Mr. President of the Senate: The matter being of urgent interest
for the welfare of the country, I am compelled to set aside the usual
formulas and to ask you please to begin this session by taking cog
nizance of this sheet and making it known at once to the honorable
members of the Senate.
Gentlemen: You nil have read with deep interest the message preented by Don Victoriano Huerta to the Congress of the Union on the
16th instant.
There is no doubt, gentlemen, that you as well as myself felt indig
nant in the face of the accumulation of falsities contained in that
document. Whom does that message aim to deceive, gentlemen? The
Congress of the Union? No, gentlemen; all its members are cultured
persons who take an interest in politics, who are in touch with
events in this country, and who can not be deceived on the subject.
Is it the Mexican Nation that is to be deceived? Is it this noble
country which, trusting in your honesty, has placed in your hands
her most sacred interests? What must the National Assembly do in
this case? It must respond promptly to the trust and confidence of
the nation which has honored this body with her representation, and
it must let her know the truth and so prevent her falling into the
abyss which is opening at her feet.
The truth is this: During the reign of Don Victoriano Huerta not
only has nothing been done in favor of the pacification of the country,
but the present condition of the Mexican Republic is infinitely worse
than ever before. The revolution is spreading everywhere. Many na
tions, formerly good friends of Mexico, now refuse to recognize this Gov
ernment, since it is an illegal one. Our coin is depreciated, our credit
in the throes of agony. The whole press of the Republic, either
muzzled or shamelessly sold to the Government, systematically conceals
the truth. Our fields are abandoned. Many towns have been destroyed,
and, lastly, famine and misery in all its forms threaten to spread
throughout our unhappy country. What is the cause of such a‘wretched
situation ?
First, and above anything else, this condition is due to the fact that
the Mexican people can not submit and yield to and accept as President
of the Republic the soldier who snatched the power by means of a
treason and whose first act on rising to the Presidency was to assassi
nate in the most cowardly manner the President and Vice President
legally consecrated by the popular vote, and the first of these two men.
he who promoted and gave position to Don Victoriano Huerta and
covered him with honors, was the man to whom Victoriano Huerta pub
licly swore loyalty and faithfulness.
In the second place, this situation is the result of the means adopted
by Don Victoriano Huerta and which he has been employing in order
to obtain the pacification of the country. You know what these means
are; nothing but extermination, death for all the men. all the families,
all the towns which do not sympathize with his Government.
Peace will be made at any cost whatever, said Don Victoriano Huerta.
Have you studied, gentlemen, the terrible meaning of these words of
44915—13387
23
the egotistical, ferocious man. Don V ictoriano H uerta?
They mean
that he is ready to shed all the Mexican blood, to cover with corpses
the whole surface o f the national territory, to convert our country into
one immense ruin, so that he may not leave the presidential chair, nor
shed a single drop o f his own blood.
In his insane anxiety to keep the post o f President—
I ask the Senate to listen to this—
In his insane anxiety to keep the post o f President, V ictoriano
Huerta is com m itting a new infam y.
He is provoking an inter
national conflict with the United States o f America.
Where was that said? On the floor of the Mexican senate,
by a Mexican senator who had made his will, had made his
peace with God, had bid farewell to his family, knowing that
he would go to his immediate death.
The Senate o f the United States wants to observe these
words and hear where they come from—from the senator from
Chiapas, Belisario Dominguez, who was immediately killed,
who knew that he would be killed, and who was willing to die
to have the right to speak the truth in the cause o f humanity,
and of justice, and of Mexico.
In his insane anxiety to keep the post o f President Victoriano
Huerta is com m itting a new infam y. lie is provoking an international
conflict with the United States o f America, a conflict, in which, if it
is to be solved by fighting, all surviving M exicans would participate,
giving stoically the last drop o f their blood, giving their lives— all
save Don V ictoriano Huerta and Don Aureliano B lan qu et; because
these disgraced ones are stained with the blot o f treason, and the
nation and the army will repudiate them when the time comes.
It seems as if our ruin were unavoidable, for Don V ictoriano Huerta
has taken hold o f power in such a way. in order to insure the triumph
o f his candidacy to the Presidency o f the Republic in the elections to
be held October 2G. that he has not hesitated to violate the sovereignty
o f the greater part o f the States, deposing the legally elected constitu
tional governors and supplanting them with m ilitary governors who will
take good care to cheat the people by means o f ridiculous and criminal
farces.
And so they did cheat the people by elections that were crimi
nal under the order of Huerta, an order which I shall presently
read into the R ecord.
However, gentlemen, a supreme effort might save everything.
Let
the national assembly fulfill its duty and the nation is saved, and she
will rise up and become greater, stronger, more beautiful than ever.
The national assembly has the duty o f deposing Don Victoriano
Huerta from the Presidency
He Is the one against whom our brothers,
up in arms in the North, protest, and. consequently, he is the one least
able to carry out the pacification which is the supreme desire o f all
Mexicans.
You will tel' me, gentlemen, that the attem pt is d an gerou s; for Don
V ictcriano Huerta is a bloodthirsty and ferocious soldier who assassi
nates anyone whc is an obstacle to his w ish es; but this should not
matter, gentlemen. The country exacts from you the fulfillment o f a
duty, though there is the risk, the certainty, that you will lose your lives.
Is this man without patriotism? Is this man without love
of country? Is this man without love of justice and righteous
ness in government, when he makes his appeal to the Mexi
can Senate? Shall we despise a people capable of such a sacri
fice as this great senator who died in the performance o f duty
deliberately?
He sa id :
If, in your anxiety to see peace reigning again in the Republic, you
com m itted a mistake and put faith in the false words o f the man who
promised to pacify the Republic, to-day, when you see clearly that
this man is an imposter, a wicked inept who is fast pushing the nation
toward ruin, will you, fo r fear o f death, permit such a man to continue
to wield pow er? Reflect, gentlemen, meditate, and reply to this query.
W hat would be said o f those on a vessel who, during a violent storm
on a treacherous sea, would appoint as pilot a butcher who had no
44915— 13387
24
nautical knowledge, who was on his first sea trip, and who had no
other recommendation to the post than the fa ct o f his having betrayed
and assassinated the captain o f the vessel?
Your duty is unalterable, ineludible, gentlemen, and the nation ex
pects o f you its fulfillment.
This first duty discharged, it will be easy for the National Assembly
to fulfill others derived from it, asking all revolutionary chiefs to stop
all active hostilities and to appoint their delegates in order that by
general accord the President be elected who is to call for presi
dential elections, and who is to use care that these be carried out in
all legality.
The world is looking on us, gentlemen, members of the National
Assembly, and the nation hopes that you will honor her before the
world, saving her from the shame o f having as first magistrate a
traitor and an assassin.
(Signed)
D r . B. D o m i n g u e z ,
S en a to r
f o r C h ia p a s .
Immediately afterwards, Senator Belisaryo Dominguez sud
denly and mysteriously disappeared and was reported to have
been killed.
On October 9th, the Chamber of Deputies of the Congress of
Mexico passed the following resolution:
(1 ) T hat a commission form ed o f three deputies be appointed for
the purpose o f making all necessary investigations to find out where
Senator Belisaryo Dominguez is and that it be empowered with all
the facilities which it deems necessary for the m atter in hand.
(2 )
That the senate be invited to appoint a commission for the same
object.
(3 ) The commission o f the Camara will propose what may
be necessary in view o f the result o f the investigation.
(4 ) That this
m otion be comm unicated to the executive so that he may impart
whatever aid may be necessary to the commission or commissions, as
the case may be, making known to him that the national representation
places the lives o f the deputies and senators under the protection of
said executive who has at his disposition the necessary elements tc
enforce the im munity which the constitution authorizes to those
functionaries.
(5 ) That said executive be inform ed that in case the
disappearance o f another deputy or senator occurs and the national
representation will be obliged to celebrate its session where it may
find guarantees.
Immediately afterwards, on October 10, in the afternoon.
Huerta’s minister of gobernacion appeared in the chamber and
demanded a reconsideration of these resolutions. The presi
dent of the Chamber of Deputies arose and adjourned the
chamber, whereupon 110 deputies present were arrested by
Huerta's soldiers and sent to the penitentiary. Huerta had all
the exits barred and appeared in person before the Congress to
enforce his demand, and his demand, in spite of his bloody
character and crnel power, was not acceded to by the Mexican
Congress. Huerta immediately published a decree declaring the
Congress dissolved and without further power and immediately
declared the judicial and legislative power vested in himself
and that the constitutional guaranties against arrest o f mem
bers of Congress were suspended.
These decrees were signed by him as of October 11, but were
put into effect October 10, as follow s:
Victorlano Huerta, constitutional President ad interim o f the M exi
can United States, to its inhabitants makes known that the Chamber
o f Deputies and Senators o f the Tw enty-sixth Legislature having been
dissolved and inhabilitated from exercising their functions and until
the people elect new m agistrates who shall take over the legislative
powers, and in the belief that the Government should count on all the
necessary faculties to face the situation and to reestablish the con
stitutional order o f things in the shortest possible time as is its pur
pose since October 26 has been set as a date fo r elections for deputies
and senators, has seen fit to decree that articles o f decree.
A rticle O ne. The judicial power o f the federation shall continue in
Its functions within the lim its set by the constitution o f the Republic
44915— 13387
25
and the decree o f the executive o f October 10 o f this month and such
others as shall be issued by him.
A rticle T w o . The executive power o f the union conserves the pow
ers conferred upon him by the constitution and assumes furtherm ore
the departments o f gobernacion, hacienda, and war only for the time
absolutely necessary for the reestablishment o f the legislative power,
in the meantime the executive takes upon him self the powers granted
the legislative power by the constitution in the aforem entioned de
partm ents and w ill make use o f them by issuing decrees which shall be
observed generally and which he may deem expedient for the public
welfare.
A rticle T h ree . The executive o f the union will render an account
to the legislative power o f the use which he makes o f the powers
which he assumes by means o f this decree as soon as this is in fu n c
tion. W herefore, I order that this be printed, published, and given due
fulfillment. Given at the National Palace o f Mexico, October 11, 1913.
(Signed)
V. H uerta .
V ictoriano Huerta, constitutional president ad interim o f the M exi
can United States, to its inhabitants makes known that in view o f the
fa ct that the Chamber o f Deputies and Senators of the Congress o f
the union have been dissolved and inhabilitated to perform their fu n c
tions, and in view o f the powers which I hold in the Department of
Gobernacion according to the decree o f October 11 o f this year, I
have seen fit to decree that article 1 , the constitutional exemption from
arrest and ju dicial action which the citizens which form ed the Twentysixth Congress o f the union enjoyed in view o f their functions, is
hereby repealed and consequently they are subject to the jurisdiction
o f the tribunals corresponding to the case in the event that they are
guilty o f any crime or offense. W herefore 1 order that this be printed,
published, and duly fulfilled. Given at the National Palace in Mexico
October 11, 1913.
(Signed)
V. H uerta .
On October 11 the entire diplomatic corps was received by the
minister of foreign affairs, who advised them that while the act
of Huerta’s Government was unconstitutional, still that the
Government had become impossible with the Chamber as at pres
ent constituted. The Spanish minister, at an hour after mid
night, October 10, called on Nelson O'Shaughnessy, the Ameri
can charge d ’affaires, and they went together and demanded
guaranties of the minister of foreign affairs for the lives of thearrested Congressmen. What a spectacle before the civilized
world is this midnight visit to prevent wholesale assassination!
The promise was given, but only a list of 84 was presented as
those in prison. What became of the 24 others arrested I do
not know, but I should like to know.
On October 13 Huerta charged the members of Congress with
sedition and treason, and stated that they should be tried.
Huerta’s secretary informed O’Shaughnessy that most of the
deputies arrested had been set at liberty, but in point of fact
they acknowledged having 84 of the 110 arrested in the peniten
tiary at midnight, October 10, and on November 13, 1913, the
members of Congress whose names 1 have already given were
recorded still in the penitentiary, and many o f them were still
in the penitentiary when we took Vera Cruz.
The President of the United States had refused to recognize
Huerta for the reasons well known, and had been urging a new
election so that the people of Mexico, even under the defective
election law, might choose a successor to Huerta.
On October 10, 1913, when Huerta had put the Mexican Con
gress in the penitentiary, he issued a decree for the election, on
October 26, of a new Congress and of a President.
On October 14, 1913, he issued the following decree, modifying
the election laws to make the corrupt control of the election
absolutely certain, putting the power in the hands o f his iu4 491 5— 13387
■■■■h
m h h b b
strum ents. I ask perm ission to pu t the d ecree in to the R ecord
w ith ou t reading.
Mr. SHAFROTH. I wish the Senator from Oklahoma would
read the order which he says Huerta issued setting aside the
election laws.
Mr. OWEN. The first order issued was this:
Victoriano Huerta, constitutional President ad interim o f the Mexi
can United States, to its inhabitants makes known that the Chamber
o f Deputies and Senators o f the 26th legislature having been dissolved
and inhabilitated from exercising their functions, and until the people
elect new m agistrates who shall take over the legislative powers, and
in the belief that the Government should count on all the necessary
faculties to face the situation and to reestablish the constitutional
order o f things in the shortest possible time, as is its purpose, since
October 26 has been set as a date for elections for deputies and sena
tors, has seen fit to decree that articles o f decree.
A r t ic l e o n e . The ju dicial power o f the federation shall continue in
its functions within the limits set by the constitution o f the Republic
and the decree o f the Executive o f October 10 o f this month and such
others as shall be issued by him.
A rticle tw o . The executive power o f the Union conserves the pow
ers conferred upon him by the constitution and assumes, furtherm ore,
the departments o f gobernacion, hacienda, and war only for the time
absolutely necessary fo r the reestablishment o f the legislative power.
In the meantime the Executive takes upon him self the powers granted
the legislative power by the constitution in the aforem entioned de
partments and will make use o f them by issuing decrees, which shall
be observed generally and which he may deem expedient fo r the public
welfare.
A r t ic l e t h r e e . The E xecutive o f the Union will render an account
to the legislative power o f the use which he makes o f the powers which
he assumes by means o f this decree as soon as this is in function.
W herefore I order that this be printed, published, and given due fu l
fillment.
At the same time he issued a decree declaring that the right
of safety and immunity from arrest o f members of congress
was set aside and abrogated and, as I have stated, put the
whole congress in the penitentiary. He ja y s:
I have seen fit to decree that article 1 , the constitutional exemption
from arrest and judicial action which the citizens w hich form ed the
twenty-sixth congress o f the union enjoyed in view o f their functions, is
hereby repealed.
Mr. SHAFROTH. And yet some people want such a man
recognized as the president of Mexico?
Mr. OWEN. Oh, yes; some people want him recognized. I
do not know why. I suppose they do not know about him,
but I thought it well enough to let the people of this country
know something about Huerta. For that reason I have thought
proper to present these various documents, showing his con
duct as the alleged head of the Mexican Government Here
is the decree which he issued as to the election laws, putting the
power in the hands of his military governors and jefe politicos
that they might be able to make false returns of the elections:
V ictoriano Huerta, C onstitutional President ad interim o f the United
Mexican States, to the inhabitants th e r e o f: Know ye. that to the end
that the extraordinary elections o f senators and deputies to the Con
gress o f the Union, convoked by decree under date o f the 10th instant,
be carried out with all regularity, I have seen fit to decree the fol
lowing :
“ A rticle 1. In accordance with article 5 o f the decree o f the 10th
instant, the extraordinary elections o f deputies and senators will be
subject to the conditions o f the electoral law o f December 19, 1911,
with the additions and m odifications which follow .
“ A rt . 2. The elections shall be bv direct v o t e ; they shall be held
at the same time as those for president and vice president o f the Re
public ; the same electoral divisions shall serve for them as were
form ed under the law to that effect o f the 31st o f May last, and the
same designation o f polling officials and scrutinizers which was made
44915— 13387
under the provisions o f the same law shall subsist. Candidates must
register.
“A rt. 3. The registration o f the candidates provided for in article
6S o f the electoral law o f December 19, 1911, shall be carried out before
the 2 0 th o f this month, and the handing over o f credentials which is
ordered in the same article, as well as the designation of representa
tives o f parties or candidates, shall he complied with at the same time
these latter are inscribed.
A rticle 4. The voting shall be subject to the terms o f the electoral
law o f December 19, 1911, and in accord with the follow in g ru les:
New polling regulations. “ 1. The polling official shall hand to each
voter, in addition to the lists which correspond to the election o f Presi
dent and Vice President o f the Republic, the various lists for the cast
ing o f votes for deputies and senators and shall proceed to collect the
votes in urns or boxes which shall be separate and distinctly marked,
one for the election o f President and Vice President, another for the
election o f deputies, and a third for the election o f senators.
Second. When the polls are closed definitely, the total count o f the
votes cast fo r President and Vice President shall be made in accordance
with the law o f the 31st o f last May, and afterwards the count shall be
made o f the votes for deputies and senators, respectively, the result of
the latter being made known in separate documents, which shall be re
mitted, together with the designation o f the electoral district and the
voting slips to the highest authority residing in the place designated as
capital (cabecera) o f the electoral district (that is, to his m ilitary gov
ern ors), and if there be no cabecera they shall be turned over to the
highest m unicipal authority. Juntas to count ballots.
Third. The count o f the votes cast in each electoral district shall be
made by a junta form ed by the highest political authority to which the
foregoing fraction refers, or in default o f him by the first m unicipal
authority and by two councilm en (con cajalesi named by the ayuntam iento o f the cabecera o f the electoral district. The default o f any of
the members o f this junta shall be made good by the regideres o f the
ayuntamiento, according to the order o f their enumeration, and in de
fault o f these, by those who will have held such position the preceding
year, according to their enumeration. The designation of the tw o coun
cilmen who are to form part o f the junta shall be made by the ayuntamientos in public session and by secret ballot on Thursday the 23d of
the present month. Jefe P olitico to preside.
Fourth. The junta shall assemble in junta shall be made by the
ayuntamiente on Sunday, the 26th o f the present month, at 6 o'clock in
the evening, being presided over by the jefe politico, and in his
absence by the highest municipal authority. It shall designate secre
tary from among its members and shall commission another o f its
members to examine the returns as they be received, and the ju nta shall
reassemble on the 2d day o f November next to make the count, after
the rendering o f the report which the commission shall present.
Fifth. The junta shall abstain from making any remarks respecting
the defects which affect the votes cast or those which may be alleged
by the parties or candidates registered, and shall lim it itself to mak
ing them known in its minutes, so that they may be passed upon defi
nitely by the Chamber o f Deputies or by the corresponding legislature,
according to whether it is a matter o f election o f deputies or senators.
Credentials in quadruplicate.
Sixth. A fter the count has been made o f votes cast, the deputies
proprietory and substitute shall be declared elected and the number of
votes cast for each one o f the candidates for senator proprietory and
substitute shall be declared and the corresponding reports shall be made.
The report in regard to deputies shall be made in four c o p ie s ; one
shall be sent to the Chamber o f Deputies, together with all the elec
tion documents and vote certifica tes; another copy shall be sent to
the M inistry o f Gobernacion : and the other two shall be remitted to the
citizens elected deputy proprietory and substitute, respectively, so that
they may serve as credentials. The report o f the election o f senators
shall be made in three copies, one o f which shall be sent to the Senate,
one to the M inistry o f Gobernacion. and the third to the Legislature
o f the State, that that body may make its declaration relative to the
election o f senators proprietory and substitute. To report before Novem
ber 1 0 .
Seventh. The junta shall make its report as soon as it shall have re
ceived those o f all the m unicipalities o f the electoral district or a
report to the effect that the elections were not held, but in any case
it must present its report by the 10th o f next November. The result
o f the count made by the junta shall be published immediately after
its session shall have adjourned on the doors o f the m unicipal palace
and as soon as possible thereafter in the official organ o f the correspond
ing federative entity.
44915— 13387
•28
A r t . 5. The juntas fo r exam ining the votes shall make their counts
strictly in accordance with the reports from the various booths and
abstain from making any comment on the votes emitted, under pain of
a $200 fine for each member o f the ju nta who violates this rule. The
respective chamber or legislature, as the case may be, w ill hand over to
the respective judges o f the district any violators of this law, so that
the fine aforesaid may be duly enforced. Therefore, I order that be
printed, published, and duly carried out.
Given in the National Palace o f Mexico, October 12, 1913.
(Signed)
V. P. H derta .
On October 22 there were sent out private instructions to the
governors of various States instructing them in effect to make
false returns in Huerta’s interest, and to make sure that the
election of President would be void by returning an insufficient
number of precincts, as follow s:
P R IV A T E
IN S T R U C T IO N S
FR O M
TH E
FED ER A L.
G O V ERN M EN T
TO
G EN .
J O A Q U IN M A A S, M I L I T A R Y G O VERNO R O F T H E S T A T E O F P U E B L A , TO T H E
E N D T H A T H E M A Y T R A N S M I T T H E S A M E T O T H E J E F E S P O L IT IC O S O F
T H E STA TE .
First. I f any municipal president has entered into agreements with
any o f the m ilitant political parties his removal from office shall be
discreetly sought, and in the case it should not be possible, cautious
efforts shall be made to secure complete solidarity between said
presidents and the jefes politicos.
Second. It is especially recommended that the persons in charge
o f the polls should be com pletely and absolutely reliable, so that
they may follow the instructions given to them.
Third. I f there should be sufficient time for it, strict orders should
be given that polls for rural estates should not be established in
the seat o f the m unicipality or town, but in the estates themselves
o f the electoral division, this for the purpose o f avoiding the attend
ance o f those who are to take charge o f the polls, the principal object
being to prevent the elections in two-thirds, plus one. o f the polls
constituting the district. Therefore the greatest number o f polls
shall be -----------. T o meet the provisions of the law and conceal the
above-mentioned commission, a complete list should be published, g iv
ing the names o f the persons who are to have charge o f the polls in
accordance with article 13 o f the electoral law o f May 31, 1913, it
being understood that only the appointments corresponding to the
third part or less shall be sent to the sections, among which are to
be included the polls in the urban wards.
Fourth. In all the polls which may operate blank tickets shall be
made use o f in order that the absolute m ajority o f the votes may be
cast in fa vor o f Gen. Huerta for President and Gen. Blanquet for Vice
President.
F ifth. In spite o f the fa ct that article 31 provides that the returns
should be at once and directly sent to the chamber o f deputies, the
chairman o f the polls shall be instructed that the returns be sent to
the political prefecture, which returns shall be quickly examined by the
jefe politico, and if the same are found to lie in accordance with the
instructions given therein, he shall return them to the chairman, in
form ing them that they must send them directly to the chamber of
deputies. I f upon making the exam ination it should appear that the
third part o f the polls have not acted right, they shall fail to send
the number o f returns that may be necessary to the end that the
chamber o f deputies may receive only one-third or less o f the total.
Sixth. Political parties and citizens shall tie given full freedom in
the polls which may operate, allow ing them to make all kinds o f pro
tests, provided they refer to votes in fa vor o f any o f the candidates
appearing before the p eople; but care shall be taken that such protests
do not refer to the votes mentioned in paragraph 4 o f these instructions.
Seventh. If upon exam ining the returns the jefes p oliticos should
find that the votes do not agree with the instructions, before sending
them they should fix them up to the end that the note o f transm is
sion, the minutes o f the election, etc., should attree with the in
structions.
,
. _
Eighth. Persons shall be chosen who may inspire absolute confidence
and may be well versed in the electoral law to make a quiet and re
served inspection o f the polls which may be in operation and to pre
sent before them all sorts o f protests, in accordance with article 30
o f the electoral law. it being understood that all protests should refer
to the fandidates who may lie In the field, but -never in regard to votes
mentioned in paragraph 4.
44915— 13387
29
Ninth. After elections they shall make a quick concentration o f the
polls which were in operation and shall communicate this inform ation
to the Government if possible on the same day and in cipher and by
special courier.
Tenth. Under their most strict responsibility the governor o f a State
who may receive these instructions shall comply with them under the
penalty o f discharge o f office and other punishment which the Federal
Government may see fit to apply.
M exico , O c to b er 22, 191S.
By October 15 it bad become obvious’ and the representatives
of nearly all of the powers except Great Britain had reached
the point where they considered armed intervention by the
United States as practically inevitable. It was already obvious
that Huerta would not permit Diaz to stand as a candidate for
the Presidency, notwithstanding his agreement with him of Feb
ruary 18, 1913.
Diaz had named the cabinet, it is true, but the cabinet was
set aside one by one, and Diaz was instructed to go to Japan
and then to Europe and finally dared not to return to Mexico,
but receiving a command from Huerta to return to Mexico to
resume his post in the army, Diaz came to Vera Cruz, was put
under instant surveillance by Huerta’s forces, but, by a skill
ful maneuver, fled by night to a warship and saved his life; he
profoundly believed that he was on the point of being assas
sinated and did flee by night just before the election, and is
now in the United States.
On October 23 Huerta advised the diplomatic corps of
Mexico City that he had dissolved the Congress of Mexico,
because it was disloyal and revolutionary, 50 deputies having
joined the revolutionists. He stated that he was not a candi
date for the presidential office; that votes for him would be
null and void, even if a majority of votes were cast for him:
that he would not accept the Presidency, not only because the
constitution prohibited him, but because lie had given public
promise to the contrary, and he requested the diplomats to give
these solemn assurances to their respective countries.
Immediately before the election of October 26 the country
was flooded with circulars urging the people to vote for Huerta
for President. The circulars were as big as the door o f the
Senate Chamber, urging people to vote for this man who said
he was not running for the Presidency. Immediately after the
election, on October 27, Huerta’s minister of gobernacion pub
licly announced that the election returns from Puebla, San Luis
Potosi, showed a “ landslide” for Huerta and Blanquette.
Mr. THOMAS. It was a case o f the office seeking the man?
Mr. OWEN. Yes. the office sought the man; he could not
escape it. Huerta then issued an intimidating decree to raise
the army to 150,000 men, a decree which he could not carry out.
On November 20, 1913, the newly elected Mexican Congress
convened. Huerta addressed them and they replied with assur
ances o f patriotism, etc., and on December 10, the grand com
mittee of Congress solemnly reported to Huerta that of 14,425
voting precincts, only 7,157 reported, and hence that there had
been no election o f a president, under article 42, clause 3, of
the constitution of Mexico. This result (a result which Huerta
had carefully planned, as I have explained, by modifying
the election laws, and then giving secret instructions to his
military governors) they elaborately explained to Huerta, could
be accounted for first, because a part of the territory was in
44915—13387
revolution, and second, because a part of the territory was
near tbe revolutionary country, and third, that where the terri
tory was under Huerta’s control the people had not voted for
“ reasons o f a general nature.”
They recommended that Huerta continue as President until
a lawful election at some future time when Congress should
issue the necessary declaration.
I sumbit Exhibit 4, a memorial o f a committee of the people
of Pueblo and Tlaxcala and addressed to John Lind, showing a
very interesting Mexican point of view. I omit names for
obvious reasons.
Mr. President, I have thought proper to put into the Record
the documents showing the conduct of this man, because I do
not think the people o f the United States sufficiently under
stand the facts relating to our occupation of Vera Cruz. We
are there primarily because of what might be called the straw
that broke the camel’s back, the open and flagrant insult before
the nations o f the world of our flag and of our uniform by the
arrest of our unarmed men and parading them through the
streets o f Tampico in derision, and then refusing to make
the amends required by international law. I believe that
Senator Dominguez stated the truth when at the cost of his
life he charged Huerta with the purpose of bringing about a
conflict with the United States. And what was the purpose
o f bringing about a conflict with the United States? It was to
save his precious neck, because Zapata, with thousands of
armed men on the south, had sworn to kill Huerta for treason
and murder, and Villa, with more thousands o f armed men on
the north, had sworn to take Huerta’s life for treason to
Mexico. So there is only one safe place for Huerta, and that is
under our flag, that would perhaps have mercy on this miser
able wretch, who deserves to be overthrown by his own people
and punished by his own people for his crimes against them.
Mr. WEEKS. Mr. President, before the Senator takes his
seat, I should like to ask him if he thinks that the statement
he has just made will be an aid to the mediators in their labors?
Mr. OWEN. I will say, Mr. President, that I do not think
the mediators will be able to accomplish anything with a man
like Huerta. I will say further, however, that the history
which I have put in the Record here this afternoon in regard
to this man whom we have not recognized, and ought not to
recognize, will in no wise affect the question of mediation. The
mediators will deal with the questions that are laid before them,
but the people of the United States ought to know what manner
of man this is that our Government has refused to recognize, and
I feel justified in giving the reasons for that refusal.
E x h ib i t 1.
Co n stitu tion op th e R epublic of M e xic o , 1853, A bstract R odri
quez ' s E d it io n .
T itle I, S ection 1.— R i g h t s o f m a n .
A rticle 2. In a Republic all are born free.
A rt . 3. Instruction is free.
A rt . 4. Every man is free to engage in any profession, pursuit, or
occupation, and avail him self o f its products.
A rt . 5. (Am ended by law o f Sept. 25, 1873.) No one shall be com
pelled to do personal work w ithout com pensation and w ithout his
full consent.
A rt . 7. (Am ended by law o f M ay 15, 1883.) Freedom o f publication
lim ited only by the respect due to private life, m orals, and public
peace.
44915— 13387
31
A rt . 8. Right to petition guaranteed.
A r t . 10. Right to carry arms guaranteed, but the law shall designate
what arms are prohibited.
A rt . 13. No one shall be tried according to special laws or by special
tribunals. No persons or corporations shall have privileges or enjoy
emoluments not in compensation for public service according to law.
M ilitary trial o f crim inal cases allowed only fo r m ilitary discipline.
A rt . 14. No retroactive laws shall be enacted.
A rt . 1G. N o person shall be molested in his person, fam ily, domicile,
papers, or possessions except under an order In writing.
A r t . 17. No arrest fo r debts.
A dm inistration o f justice shall be
gratuitous, ju dicial costs being abolished.
A rt. 18. Imprisonment only fo r crimes deserving corporal punish
ment ; otherwise, liberty on bail.
A rt . 19. No detention to exceed three days, unless justified by a
warrant under the law.
M altreatm ent during confinement to be
severely punished.
A rt. 20. Guaranties in every crim inal trial—
(1 ) Grounds o f proceeding and name o f accuser made known.
(2 ) Prelim inary exam ination within 48 hours.
(3 ) Confronted with witnesses against crim inal.
(4 ) Given all inform ation on record which he mav need for his
defense.
(5 ) He shall be heard in his defense.
A rt. 21. Im position o f penalties by ju dicial authority. P olitical and
executive authorities to impose fines and im prisonm ent as disciplinary
measures and impose fines o f not over $500 and imprisonment not
more than one month as disciplinarian measures as the law shall
expressly determine.
A r t . 22. M utilation, torture, excessive fines, confiscation o f property,
corruption o f blood prohibited.
Art, 23. Penalty o f death abolished for political offenses and not
Imposed except in cases o f treason during foreign war, highway rob
bery, arson, parricide, murder in the first degree, grave offenses o f
military character, piracy.
A rt. 24. No crim inal case shall have more than three instances.
A rt. 26. The quartering o f soldiers prohibited in time o f peace.
A rt . 27. Private property condemned fo r public use and upon com
pensation.
A rt. 28. There shall be no m onopolies o f any kind, whether govern
mental or private, inventions excepted.
A rt. 29. In cases o f invasion or disturbance o f the public peace, or
other emergency, residents with the advice o f the council of ministers
and the approval o f Congress or during recess o f the permanent com
mittee, may suspend constitution guaranties except those relating to
life.
T it l e I, S e c t io n 2— M e x i c a n s , n a t i o n a l i t y a n d d u t ie s .
T itle I, Section 3— F o r e i g n e r s .
T itle I, S e c t io n 4— M e x i c a n c i t i z e n s h i p , r i g h t t o h o l d o ffic e , e t c .
T itle II, Section 1— N a t i o n a l s o v e r e i g n t y a n d f o r m o f g o v e r n m e n t .
A rt . 39. Sovereignty is in the people. All public power emanates
from the people. The people have at all times the inalienable right to
change the form o f their government.
A r t . 40. The States are free and sovereign in all that concerns their
Internal government, but united in a federation under the constitution.
A rt . 41. The people exercise their sovereignty through the federal
powers and the State powers.
T itle II, Section 2— N a t i o n a l t e r r i t o r y a n d l i m i t s o f t h e S t a t e s .
T i t l e . III.— D i v i s i o n o f p o w e r s .
T itle III, S ection 1.— L e g i s l a t i v e p o w e r .
A r t . 51 (amended by law o f Nov. 13, 1874). Legislative power vested
in the General Congress, consisting o f a Chamber o f Deputies and the
Senate.
A rt . 52 (amended by law o f Nov. 13, 18 74). Members o f Chamber o f
Deputies elected every tw o years.
A rt . 55. E lections shall be by indirect and secret ballot under the
electoral law.
A rt . 57 (amended by law o f Nov. 13, 1874). The office o f Deputy and
Senator may not be held by the same person.
A rt. 58 (amended by law o f Nov. 13, 1874). They may not hold
another federal office w ithout consent o f their respective chamber. The
Senate consists o f two senators from each State and two for the f e d
eral D istrict. E lection o f senators shall be indirect, the legislature of
each State declaring who has obtained the m ajority o f votes cast.
T h e S e n a t e s h a ll b e r e n e w e d b y h a l f e v e r y t w o y e a r s .
44915— 13387
A r t . 60 (amended by law o f Nov. 13, 1874). Each chamber shall be
the judge o f the election o f its members.
A r t . 62 (amended by law o f Nov. 13, 1874). Congress shall hold two
sessions each year.
A r t . 64 (amended by law o f Nov. 13. 1874). Action o f Congress shall
be in the form o f laws or resolutions which shall be communicated to
the Executive after having been signed by the presidents o f both
chambers, etc.
A r t . 65 (amended by law o f Nov. 13, 1874). The right to originate
legislation belongs to the President and to the deputies and senators
or to the State legislature.
A rt . 69 (amended by law o f Nov. 13, 1874). The Executive shall
transm it to the Chamber o f Deputies on the last day of the session
accounts fo r the year and the budget fo r the next year.
A r t . 71 (amended by law o f Nov. 13. 1874). B ills and resolutions
assed by both chambers and approved by the Executive shall be immeiately published. B ills or resolutions rejected by the Executive may
be passed by a m ajority in each House.
Special sessions o f Congress.
A rt . 72. (Amended by law o f Nov. 13, 1874, Dec. 14, 1883, June 2,
1882, Apr. 24, 1896.) Congress shall have power to admit new
states, to form new states upon certain conditions, to establish con
ditions o f loans on the credit o f the nation and to approve said
loans, to recognize and order the payment o f the national debt, to fix
duties on foreign commerce, to create or abolish federal offices and to
fix their salaries, to declare war, to regulate issuance o f letters o f
marque, taking o f prizes on sea or land, the maritime law o f peace
or war. to grant or refuse permission o f foreign troops to enter the
republic, to establish mints, regulate the value and kinds o f national
coin, to make rules for the occupation and sale o f public lands, to
grant pardons, to appoint at a join t session o f both chambers a presi
dent o f the republic w ho shall act in case o f absolute or temporary
vacancy o f the presidency, either as a substitute or as a president
ad interim.
The chamber o f deputies has power to exercise its power regarding
the appointments o f a constitutional president o f the republic, justices
o f the supreme court and senators o f the federal d is tr ic t ; to pass
upon the resignations o f the president o f the republic, justices o f the
supreme court, and to grant leaves o f absence requested by the presi
dent ; to supervise the com ptroller o f the trea su ry ; to form ulate ar
ticles o f im peachm ent; to approve the annual budget and originate
taxation.
The senate has power to approve the tre a tie s; to confirm certain
nom inations made by the P resid en t; to authorize sending troops out
side o f the R ep u blic; to consent to the presence o f fleets o f another
nation fo r more than one month in the waters o f the R ep u blic; to
declare when the constitutional powers o f any State have disappeared
and the moment has arrived to give said State a provisional governor,
who shall order elections to be held according to the constitutional law
o f the S ta te ; such governor shall be appointed by the Executive, with
the approval o f the senate or, in time o f recess, by the permanent com
mittee ; to decide auy political questions which may arise between the
powers o f a State or when constitutional order has been interrupted by
an armed conflict in consequence o f such political qu estion s; to sit as a
court o f impeachment.
A r t . 73. During the recess o f Congress there shall be a permanent
comm ittee consisting o f 29 members, 15 deputies, and 14 senators ap
pointed by their respective chambers.
A r t . 74 (amended by the law o f Nov. 13, 1874). The permanent com
mittee shall have power to consent to the use o f the national guard
as mentioned in article 7 2 ; to call by its own motion or that o f the
E xecutive an extra session o f either or both ch am bers; to approve ap
pointm ents under article 85.
T i t l e III, S e c t io n 2 .— E x e c u t i v e p o i c e r .
A rt . 76. Election o f President shall be by indirect, secret ballot under
S
A r t . 78. The president shall enter upon his duties December 1 and
serve for four years.
A rt . 79. (Amended by the law o f Oct. 3, 1882, and Apr. 24, 1896.)
In case o f absolute vacancy except upon resignation and in the case o f
temporary vacancy except upon leave o f absence, the executive power
shall vest in the secretary o f foreign relations, etc.
Congress shall assemble on the day next follow in g to elect by a
m inority a substitute President, etc.
In case o f resignation o f the President Congress shall assemble as
indicated fo r the purpose o f appointing a substitute (a ctin g ) P resident
44915— 13387
In case o f tem porary vacancy Congress shall appoint a President ad
interim.
A request fo r leave o f absence shall he addressed to the Chamber o f
Deputies, to be voted on in the Congress in join t session.
I f on the day appointed the President elected by the people should
not enter upon his duties, Congress shall at once appoint a President
ad interim i f the vacancy prove tem p orary ; but if the vacancy prove
absolute, Congress, after appointing the President ad interim, shall
order a special election. The elected President shall serve out the
unexpired constitutional term.
The vacancy o f substitute President and President ad Interim shall be
filled in the same manner.
A rt . 83. (Amended by the law o f Apr. 24, 1896.) Form o f oath to
be adm inistered to the President.
A rt . 85. The President has power to promulgate and execute the
laws, appoint and remove certain officers, to appoint with the approval
o f Congress certain officers, to dispose o f the permanent land and sea
forces and national guard fo r the defense o f the Republic, to declare
war after the passage o f the necessary law by Congress, to conduct
diplom atic negotiations and make treaties, to ca'll with the approval o f
the permanent comm ittee an extra session o f Congress, to grant pardons
according to law.
T itle III, S ection 3 . — J u d i c i a l p o w e r .
A rt . 90. The judicial powers vested in a Supreme Court and in the
D istrict and Circuit Courts.
A rt . 91. The Supreme Court shall consist o f 11 justices, etc.
A rt . 92. The Supreme Court justices shall serve for six years and
their election shall be indirect in accordance with the electoral law.
A r t . 95. No resignation o f a ju stice allowed, except for grave cause,
approved by the Congress or the permanent committee.
A r t s . 97, 98, 99, and 100. Jurisdiction o f federal tribunals.
A rt . 101. Federal tribunals shall decide all questions arising out o f
laws or acts violating individual guaranties and encroaching upon or
restricting the sovereignty o f States invading the sphere o f federal
authority.
T it l e IV .— R e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f p u b l i c f u n c t i o n a r i e s .
A r t . 103 (amended by the law o f Nov. 13. 1874). Members o f Con
gress, o f the Supreme Court, and o f the Cabinet shall be responsible
for the common offenses comm itted by them during their term o f office
and for their crimes, misdemeanors, or om issions in the exercise o f
their functions. The governors o f the States shall be responsible for
the violation o f the Federal Constitution and laws. The President
shall be likewise responsible, but during his term he can be charged
only with treason, violation o f the C onstitution, o f the electoral law,
and grave common offenses
\ r t . 104 (amended by the law o f Nov. 13, 1874). In case o f
common offense, the Chamber o f Deputies shall sit as a grand ju ry and
declare by m ajority whether proceedings should be instituted. I f the
vote is affirmative,' the accused shall be placed at the disposal o f the
ordinary courts.
„„
t
A r t . 105 (amended b y the law o f Nov. 13, 18 74). In cases o f im
peachment. the Chamber o f Deputies shall act as grand jury and the
Senate as a tribunal. I f the grand ju ry declares by a m ajority vote,
the accused shall be impeached.
A rt . 106. No pardon can be granted in cases o f impeachment.
A r t . 107. Responsibility fo r official crimes and misdemeanors en
forceable only while in office or one year thereafter.
A rt . 108. In civil cases, no privilege or Immunity in favor o f any
public functionary shall be recognized.
T it l e V . — S t a t e s o f t h e F e d e r a t i o n .
A rt . 109 (amended by the laws o f May 5, 1878, and Oct. 21, 1887).
The State shall adopt a republican, representative, and popular form
o f Government.
^ ,
..
.
.
A r t . 110. States may fix between themselves their respective bounda r A rt . I l l (amended by law o f May 1. 18 96). States can not enter
into alliances, treaties, or coalitions with another State or foreign
n a tio n ; coin money, issue paper money, stamps or stamped p a p e r ; tax
interstate traffic and commerce.
A rt . 112 States can not w ithout consent o f Congress impose port
d u tie s; have troops or vessels o f war, except in case o f invasion or
im minent peril.
. . ..
. ..
A rt . 113 States are bound to return fugitives from justice.
A r t . 114. States are bound to enforce the Federal laws.
44915— 13387
A
A kt . 116. The Federal Government is bound to protect the States
from invasion. In case o f insurrection or internal disturbance it shall
give them the same protection, provided request is made for same.
T itle V I.— G e n e r a l p r o v i s i o n s .
A rt . 117. Powers not expressly granted to Federal authorities are
reserved to the States.
A r t . 122. In time o f peace no m ilitary authorities shall exercise
other functions than those connected with m ilitary discipline, etc.
A r t . 124 (amended by act o f May 1, 18 96). The Federal Govern
ment has exclusive power to levy duties on imports, exports, and tran
sient goods, and regulate or forbid circulation o f all kinds o f goods
regardless o f their origin, for sake o f public safety or for police rea
sons.
A r t . 126. The constitution, the laws o f Congress, and the treaties
shall be the supreme law o f the Union.
T itle V II.— A m e n d m e n t s to t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n .
A rt . 127. Amendments must be agreed to by tw o-thirds vote o f the
Members present in the Congress and approved by a m ajority o f legisla
tures o f the States. The Congress shall count the votes o f the legisla
tures and declare whether the amendments have been adopted.
T it le V III.— I n v i o l a b i l i t y o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n .
A rt . 128. The constitution shall not lose its force and vigor even
if interrupted by a rebellion. I f by reason o f public disturbance a
government contrary to its principles is established, the constitution
shall be restored as soon as the people regain their liberty, and the
people figuring in the rebellion shall be tried under the constitution
and the provisions o f laws under the constitution.
E x h ib it 2.
[T ranslation .]
R esolution S tate of Co a h u ila .
Venustiano Carranza, C onstitutional Governor of the Free and Sov
ereign State o f Coahuila de Zaragoza, to the inhabitants thereof, know
y e : That the Congress o f said State has decreed as fo llo w s :
The twenty-second C onstitutional Congress o f the Free and Sover
eign State o f Coahuila decrees :
A r t . 1. Gen. V ictoriano Huerta is not recognized in his capacity
as C hief Executive o f the Republic, which office he says was conferred
upon him by the Senate, and any acts and measures which he may per
form or take in such capacity are likewise not recognized.
A rt . 2. Extraordinary powers are conferred upon the Executive of
the State in all the branches o f the public adm inistration, so that be
may abolish those which he may deem suitable, and so that he may
proceed to arm forces to cooperate in m aintaining the constitutional
order o f things in the Republic.
“ E c o n o m i c :” The Governments o f the remaining States, and the
commanders o f the federal, rural, and auxiliary forces o f the Fed
eration, should be urged to second the attitude o f the Government o f
this State.
Given in the H all o f Sessions o f the Honorable Congress o f the
State, at Saltillo, February 19, 1913.
A. B arrera , D e p u t y , P r e s i d i n g .
J. S anchez H errera , D e p u t y , S e c r e t a r y .
G abriel C alzada , D e p u t y , S e c r e t a r y .
Let this be printed, comm unicated, and observed.
S a l t il l a , F e b r u a r y lb . 1913.
V enustiano C arranza .
E. G arza P erez , S e c r e t a r y G e n e r a l.
E x h ib i t 3.
[T ranslation .]
R e s o l u t io n S t a t e
S p e c i a l c o m m i t t e e .—
of
So n o r a .
The executive o f the State is pleased to submit
to the settlem ent o f the local legislature the present conflict o f the
State in relation to the supreme executive power o f the Republic, the
statement w hereof appears in the official note referred to the opinion
o f the undersigned committee. The comm ittee has before it a case
which is extraordinary and w ithout precedent in the history o f this
legislature, and therefore there are no precedents to be consulted in
order to enlighten its opinion in the matter, so that in order to express
the present opinion we have been obliged to measure its transcendent
im portance and to consult the laws and opinions which may add Ught
and force to our deficiency in the m atter in question, so that we may
44915— 13387
35
offer, and submit to the deliberation o f this assembly, a proposition
which shall emanate from our consciences honestly, patriotically, and
calmly.
The axis about which the question propounded turns is the legality
or illegality o f the appointm ent o f Gen. V ictoriano Huerta as pro
visional President o f the Republic. We believe, like the Executive, that
the high representative capacity conferred upon the aforesaid Gen.
Huerta can not be recognized a s ’ constitutional.
As a m atter o f fa ct, the apprehension o f Messrs. Francisco I. M adero
and Jose M aria Pino Suarez, President and Vice President of the
Republic, and their cabinet, took place in contravention o f article 103
o f the constitution o f the Republic and the supreme law o f May 0, 1904.
In these texts it is prescribed that the President and Vice President of
the Republic may be impeached only fo r high treason, express violation
o f the constitution, attack upon the electoral freedom, and grave
offenses in the realm o f common law. This provision was violated, for
Messrs. Madero and Pino Suarez were apprehended w ithout any im
peachment having been made before Congress, w hich grand jury ought
to have decided whether proceedings were to be taken or not against
the said officials. From the second o f the documents sent as exhibits
by the governor o f the State it is seen that subsequently it was desired
to clothe with a pretended legality the designation o f Gen. Huerta by
saying that Messrs. M adero and Pino Suarez had resigned their p o s ts ;
that the presidency had passed to Mr. Lascurain, minister of foreign
re la tio n s; that the latter had resig n ed ; and that Gen. Huerta had
thereupon been designated President
Now that, in our opinion, the
culm inating point o f the question has been defined, it becomes appro
priate to connect It with the government o f the State o f Sonora. The
aforem entioned article 103 o f the federal constitution says that the
governors o f the States are responsible for infraction o f the federal
constitution and laws. W ould not the recognition of Gen. Huerta as
President o f the Republic, now that it has been established that said
presidency was occupied in express violation o f the constitution, imply
responsibility on the part o f the governor o f the State o f Sonora? The
constitution has been violated, and to approve this violation is to
become an accom plice in the crim e itself. Now, the undersigned com
mittee believes that it behooves the Executive to make the declaration
urgently demanded by the secretary o f the interior o f the Huerta
cabinet according to the last o f the exhibits sent to said Executive.
But inasmuch as this assembly is in turn confronted with a question of
the greatest concern to the destinies o f the nation, and as it has a
high p atriotic duty to perform in these solemn moments o f our histoiw,
the undersigned committee, on the strength o f Section X II I o f article 67
o f the political constitution o f the State, and in view o f the statement
made by the Executive in the official note serving as a basis for this
report, has the honor to propose a bill (d ra ft o f a law ) o f the tenor
given below.
Honorable chamber, we believe that we have honestly
and p atriotically fulfilled our duty to pass upon the momentous matter
submitted to our opinion. W e are firmly convinced that the proposition
which we have framed is that which is warranted by the dignity o f
our State ; and if owing to the deficiency o f our knowledge there should
be any error in the opinion submitted to the most illustrious of you,
we at least have the satisfaction o f having fulfilled the duties imposed
upon us by our conscience. The bill which we submit to the delibera
tion o f the honorable chamber is as fo llo w s :
PAW
A U T H O R IZ IN G T H E EX E C U TIV E TO R EF U SE REC OG N ITIO N
V IC T O R IA N O H U E R T A AS P R E SID E N T OF M E X IC O .
TO
GEN.
A rtice 1. The legislature o f the free and sovereign State o f Sonora
does not recognize Gen. V ictoriano Huerta as provisional president o f
the M exican Republic.
A rt . 2. The executive Is urged to utilize the powers conferred upon
him by the political constitution o f the State.
decree
no.
i
.
A rticle 1. The branches o f the Federal adm inistration are pro
visionally (placed) in charge o f the State and (m ade) subject to the
laws and provisions o f the latter.
A rt . 2. The making o f any payment, fo r the purposes referred to in
the foregoing article, to any office not subject to the executive power
o f Sonora and existing therein is prohibited.
A rt . 3. The said executive power shall provide for the organization
and operation o f the services belonging to the executive o f the Union,
attending to everything concerning the branches referred to.
44915— 13387
DECREE
NO.
2.
A r t ic l e 1. The frontier custom houses o f Agua Prieta and Nogales
are hereby qualified and opened up to international im port and export
A rt . 2. In all m atters contrary to the special laws and provisions of
the State there shall be observed the general customs orders o f June 12,
1891, and the schedules concerned, together with their additions and
revisions in force.
A r t . 3. The im port duties are reduced 20 per cent and the 5 per cent
additional which has been being paid is hereby abolished.
A rt . 4. The exportation o f cattle and horses shall be assessed as
fo llo w s :
(а ) Cattle, $2.50 a head.
(б ) Horses, broken in, $10 per head.
(c ) Horses, wild, $5 per head.
I therefore order this printed, published, and circulated for due en
forcem ent.
Given at the palace o f the executive o f the State, at Herm osillo,
March 24, 1913.
I g n a c io L . P e s q u e ir a .
L o r e n zo R o za do , S e c r e t a r y
G e n e r a l.
N o te .— This docum ent above is taken from the Diario de los Debates
(Journal o f D ebates), o f the City o f Mexico, which in turn took it
from the Official Gazette, o f Sonora, and It was at the permanent
session o f the legislature o f Sonora, held on March 5, that the com
mittee gave the opinion referred to, and it was approved.
E x h ib it 4.
M e m o r ia l
from
a C o m m it t e e R e p r e s e n t in g t h e
S t a t e s o f P u e b la an d T l a x c a l a to M r .
P eople of t h e
L in d .
S ir : In our name and in that o f the people o f the States o f Puebla
and Tlaxcala. whose general and almost unanimous sentiments we
voice, we address you with the request that you bring to the atten
tion o f His E xcellency W oodrow W ilson the fact that, as a matter
o f equity and justice, and considering that he has heard the side of
public functionaries and sym pathizers o f the Huerta Government and
o f some o f the rebels in the frontier o f our country, as well as the
opinions o f Americans residing am ong us, we, as the genuine repre
sentatives o f the true people, be given a chance to give our views on
the political situation o f the country, as it would not be in keeping
with the well-known sense o f justice o f His E xcellency W oodrow
W ilson to listen only to one side and to ignore the opinion o f the
Mexican people, expressed in divers ways, and w hich we know is
regarded by you as the principal means to guide your opinion concern
ing the international issue o f the day.
We trust that you as well as His E xcellency President W ilson will
regard this memorial as a mark o f courtesy, shown in this way to
you. the President o f the American Union and the people o f the United
States, whose Chief Executive we regard as a sincere and great friend
o f ours.
We abstain on account o f official persecution from sending vou our
credentials as the representatives we claim to be.
A lthough we feel certain that the Department of State in W ashington
must be in possession o f ample inform ation concerning the present
political situation o f Mexico, we nevertheless do not consider it officious
to refer to the events which took place between the 9th and the 18th
o f February last, in order that you may hear the opinion o f the people
on the follow in g points, to w i t : 1st. The illegality o f the Government
o f Gen. Huerta ; second, the legality o f the revolution o f the C onstitu
tional P a r t y ; and, third, the serious consequences which would natu
rally follow the recognition o f the Huerta Government by that o f the
United States, and w hich would tend to definitely establish the same.
the
il l e g a l it y o f t h e
pre se n t govern m ent.
First. The revolution o f 1910 was an act by which the Mexican
people invoked the right it had under article 39 o f the Constitution o f
the Republic, which reads as fo llo w s :
“ A r t ic l e 39. The sovereignty o f the nation Is essentially and origi
nally vested in the people
All public power emanates directly from
the people and Is Instituted for its benefit. The people have' at all
times the right to alter or m odify the form o f its governm ent.”
I f the revolution headed Dy Gen. Felix Diaz on February 9 had been
popular, it would have been legitim ate and justified, because then It
would have been initiated by the only body o f men who, under the con
stitution had the right to start it— that is, the people— and therefore
44915— 13387
I
37
any Government emanating from a revolution o f this kind will be recog
nized as a legitim ate and justifiable Government.
As a matter o f fact, the ostensible and apparent authors o f the abovementioned revolution were Gens. Bernardo Reyes, Felix Diaz, Manuel
M ondragon, and Gregorio Ruiz, together with other officers o f the
army, who caused the men in the School o f Aspirantes, o f one regiment
o f light artillery, two regiments o f mounted artillery, three regiments
o f cavalry, and the Twentieth Infantry to mutiny.
The people remained in an attitude o f expectancy, due to its sur
prise and lack o f organization, but its sym pathy was with President
M adero, and if it did not go to his rescue it was because the President
did not call on the people. It was also because he still had faith in
the discipline and loyalty o f the rest o f the army.
But wnile it is true that the people did not take up the defense o f
the Government, it did not join the rebels, for which reason the revo
lution was strictly m ilitary, and fo r this reason it lacked the sanc
tion o f article 39 o f the constitution o f M exico. The rebels did ask
the people to jo in them, but they were not. in sym pathy with it, and
therefore the Governm ent which resulted from the movement in ques
tion is lacking in constitutional foundation.
Second. Due to the fa ct that on February 15 o f this year, His E x
cellency Henry Lane W ilson, convened several members o f the diplo
m atic corps in the building o f the embassy and inform ed them o f the
com ing arrival in Mexican waters o f several American vessels and
transports with troops fo r landing, and that it was his firm and de
cided opinion that 3,000 marines would land on M exican soil and march
to the capital, the Mexican Senate, during an extra session held on the
above-mentioned day, decided to ask the resignations o f the President
and Vice President o f the Republic. This act was nevertheless un
successful.
We inclose herewith copy o f the minutes o f the session referred to,
as inclosure No. 1.
In view o f the above failure nine senators went, on the 18th o f
February last, to the office o f the m ilitary commander o f the City of
Mexico, Gen. V ictoriano Huerta, in order to induce him or convince
him with all kinds o f glow ing promises to force the above fu nction
aries to resign. Huerta finally acceded, and with his protection and
com plicity the above-mentioned senators called on President Madero
in order to force him to resign. H aving failed in their efforts, they
called on Gen. Garcia Pena, m inister o f war, and told him that the
army o f the nation should depose the President o f the Republic, but
the honorable general refused to take the hint.
The decision o f the Senate to which we have referred, as well as
the acts o f the nine senators which follow ed it, are unconstitutional,
inasmuch as article 72, nor any other provision o f the constitution,
empowers the Senate or any o f its members to request or force the
President o f the Republic to resign. Any senator or authority w ho
does not act within the law and com m its acts o f violence or o f a
crim inal character is crim inally responsible for them, even though
he may comm it them in his capacity as a senator or authority o f any
character
Third. The senators and Gen. Huerta having taken note o f the firm
attitude o f the m inister o f war in favor o f the President, Huerta and
the senators, considered from that moment as rebellious to the execu
tive power, directed Gen. Aurelio Blanquet to arrest the President
and V ice President at the National Palace and to do this in the name
o f the army.
„
When this was done Huerta assumed power and sent all over the
country the notice appearing as inclosure 2 .
The above acts o f violence are also unconstitutional Inasmuch as
they violate the provisions o f the constitution o f Mexico.
Therefore, the government which emanated from the second revo
lution is like the Felix Diaz uprising, contrary to the principles sanc
tioned by the constitution.
Fourth. The transitory government o f Gen. Huerta was sanctioned
by a pact signed by Huerta and Diaz, the form er aided by Lient. Col.
Joaquin Maas and Engineer Enrique Cepeda and the latter by Attorneys
Fidencio Hernandez and R odolfo Reyes.
Both rebel generals agreed through this pact to prevent by all means
the reestablishment o f the legitim ate government represented exclu
sively by President Madero and V ice President Pino S u a rez; and it
was also agreed that Gen. Huerta would assume power at the earliest
possible convenience.
(H uerta had already assumed it on his own
au th ority.)
.
_ ,
„
. ..
.
W e inclose herewith a fu ll copy, under Inclosure 3, o f the above
agreement, called the pact o f Ciudadela.
44915— 13387
38
It is evident that in order to establish the government o f Gen.
Huerta the constitution was completely ignored and supplanted by the
Ciudadela agreement, which confined itself to sanction the m ilitary
uprising, the acts o f violence o f Gens. Huerta and Blanquet, to de
pose the President and Vice President o f the Republic, to divest them o f
their investiture, and to permit Huerta to usurp the executive power
o f the nation.
Things have developed since February 18 in such a way that there
is no room fo r doubting that the above pact has been the directing
force o f the present government.
In fa ct, the first clause o f the above-mentioned pact indicates with
out doubt that the murders o f Messrs. Madero and Pino Suarez, imme
diately after the decision o f the legislature o f the State o f Coahuila
became known in the capital, and by which decision, dated the 19th
o f February, Gen. Huerta was not recognized as President o f the Re
public, were perpetrated with no other purpose than to prevent the
reestablishment o f the legitimate government.
ALL
OF
THAT
IS
CONTRARY TO T H E P R IN C IP L E S SANCTIONED
C O N S T IT U T IO N OF T H E R E P U B L IC .
BY
THE
Such is the origin o f the government o f Gen. Huerta, and it matters
not that 72 hours later thev may have attempted to give it a constitu
tional form , inasmuch as the old principle o f international law which
reads, “ That which is null in principle is void in its effects,” and more
so if it is borne in mind that the whole thing was done to put into
effect the pact o f the Ciudadela, which is not, so to say, the Federal
pact, which is the fundam ental and supreme law o f the land.
Now, then, all events from February 18 ahead and which gave rise
to the government o f Gen. Huerta, and in spite o f the claim they make
that it is a matter o f “ consummated fa cts,” are crim inal, illegal, and
void and they are so considered in article 128 o f the Mexican consti
tution, a provision which to this date seems to have been ignored, not
withstanding its im portance as a fundam ental law.
The article in question reads as follow s :
“ A r t . 128. The constitution shall not lose its force and vigor, even
though because o f a rebellion its enforcem ent may be suspended. In
case that by means o f a public disturbance a government contrary to
the constitution may be established, as soon as the people regains its
freedom, the observance o f it shall be enforced, and in accordance with
it and with the provisions which may have been dictated pursuant
to it, all those who may have figured in the government established
bv the revolution, and "those who may have been their accom plices
shall be tried.”
This shows your excellency the fu ll force o f article 128 o f the
constitution against the governm ent o f Gen. Huerta, and this also
shows the m otives o f basis o f the constitutional rebellion which is
grow ing in the heart o f the people, and which shall not permit the
continuation in power of Gen. Huerta, nor any other government
em anating from a m ilitary rebellion.
Therefore, to make an effort to legitim ize or to recognize the inter
national character o f a government which has emanated from a
m ilitary rebellion, sim ply because o f “ consummated fa cts,” means to
set aside the constitution o f M exico, and to legitimize and recognize
a crim e which, though it may have been perpetrated, does not fail to
be punishable, nor does it cause article 128 o f the constitution to be
inoperative.
An act o f this kind would be the equivalent o f recognizing the
right o f a th ief to the thing stolen.
Therefore, the above pretension, being founded on so frail a fou nda
tion, is repudiated by morals, civilization, and common la w ; and for
this reason the W ashington Governm ent would be responsible o f com
m itting a most lamentable moral and legal error should it recognizp the
government o f Gen. Huerta as a legitim ate government, and would
recognize it as an international entity.
T H E LEGITIM ACY OF T H E REVOLUTION OF T H E C O NSTITUTIONA LISTA S.
First. I f the people were lacking in organization at the beginning of
the uprising in order to defend the rights they were divested from by
the army which overthrew the E xecutive elected according to the laws,
so soon as it has been able to organize itself into a body it has risen
in arms against the usurper, invoking the principle sanctioned by article
39 o f the constitution.
The above rights are at the base o f the revolution and are deeply
rooted in the heart o f the Mexican people whose attitude tends to prove
that neither public opinion nor the mass o f the people have ever sanc44915— 13387
tioned the present Government. There are a few newspapers in the City
o f M exico speaking for the Government, but they do not represent the
sentiments o f the people or o f the popular mind ; they are voicing purely
and sim ply the personal views o f their publishers, all o f whom are under
the orders o f the m inister o f gobernacion (U rru tia).
Second. The constitutional government o f the free and sovereign
State o f Coahuila, acting in observance o f a decree o f its legislature,
dated February 19, this year, by which the governor o f the State was
authorized to disregard the Government o f Gen. V ictoriano Huerta
and not to recognize any o f the acts emanating from this Government.
A rticle second o f the same decree o f the legislature o f Coahuila author
ized the governor to arm troops in order to m aintain the constitutional
order.
Third. The Legislature o f the State o f Sonora, legally constituted
and acting in accordance with the law, approved a decree by which
the Government o f Gen. Iluerta was not recognized. A copy o f the
decree is herewith inclosed.
Fourth. A rticle 128 o f the federal constitution vests the people
with power and tacitly expects it to defend and maintain the integrity
o f the laws, when it reads “ as soon as the people may recover its
liberty.”
Tw o constitutional decrees emanating from two legally constituted
governments o f two States are a sufficient base for the present revo
lution o f the Constitutional Party. Those two decrees are its legal
foundation.
III.
SE R IO U S
CONSEQU EN CES
OF T H E
D E F IN IT E
E S T A B L IS H M E N T
G O VERN M EN T OF GEN. V. HU ERTA.
OF
<\,'■
y !
THE
In the first place it would establish precedent for all the armies of
the world, that they could rise in arms and depose their respective
rulers and place themselves in their stead, if they would feel that
the recognition o f the world would be forthcom ing sim ply on the
plea o f “ consummated facts.”
W hat happened yesterday in M exico could happen in the future in
Germany, Russia, England, or the United States, where, w ith refer
ence to the latter country, the Republican Party, sympathizing with
Porfirista, or Huertista party o f M exico, places President W oodrow
W ilson on a parallel with Madero, and says that the spirit o f the
latter has reincarnated in the American President.'
W hat would happen with the laws o f a country if they were at
the mercy o f the arm y? W hat would happen to a country where the
army instead o f being the support would be the arbiter o f the govern
m ent?
W hat would it mean to relegate the will and laws o f the
people to the caprice o f the arm y?
In view o f the above we believe that the “ M exico case ” is o f
interest not only to our country, but it concerns all other nations.
As a matter o f precaution and future policy the Government o f Gen.
Huerta should not be recognized.
We are o f the opinion that coup d'etat should be suppressed for
ever, leaving the question o f changing or m odifying the form o f g ov
ernment to the people, as vox populi vox del.
A
„
The third Pan-American Conference, which took place at Rio de
Janeiro, took the initiative by recommending that government growing
out o f an act o f violence should not be recognized, and we hope that
A m erica may be the first to follow this principle in connection with the
“ Mexico case.”
Besides, the government o f Gen. Huerta is politically and finan
cially connected with manv European interests.
It is stated soto
voce,' fo r example, that M exico w ill not press the contention about
the Clipperton Islands and w ill allow France to win out in payment
o f its recognition o f the Huerta government.
It appears that it is on this acount that Huerta revoked the ap
pointment he had made o f Lio de la Barra, as envoy near the court
o f Italy
Spain is being given all kinds o f encouragem ent to acquire practi
cally full control o f the land interests o f the country.
All o f the above acts are an outrage against the M exican nation and
< ntrary to the M onroe doctrine.
W ith reference to England, it is well known how im portant a r61e
has been played by Lord Cowdra.v and to w hat extent he would rule
were the Huerta government to become definitely affirmed.
As a consequence o f the above Europe would increase its political,
financial, and even m ilitary influence in Mexico, much to our detri
ment and contrary to the M onroe doctrine.
44915— 13387
w
f-
M
)* •
HI
•v lij
10
We will therefore propose, as a part o f the opinions you may have
gathered while here, for the inform ation of His Excellency W oodrow
W ilson :
First. T hat the government o f Gen. Huerta be not recognized.
Second. That if W ashington recognizes the government o f Huerta,
it should simultaneously recognize the belligerence o f the rebels.
Third. That as a m atter o f humanity the decree which prevents
the exportation o f arms, ammunition, and war material to countries
south o f the United States be revoked temporarily.
We say that this be done ns a m atter o f humanity in order to
facilitate the means by which the States o f the Mexican Union in
hands o f the C onstitutional Party to pacify the country and avoid
further bloodshed.
I f otherwise, the W ashington Government, acting under a strange
moral rule or other m otive, would recognize the Huerta Government
and refuse to recognize the belligerency o f the rebels, such act would
serve only to prolong the state o f war in this country, as the patriotic
elements o f the country would never give in nor tolerate the gov
ernment o f General Huerta.
We will say before ending that foreign residents will have the
fullest protection from the constitutional rebels, and if the requests
o f the revolution are granted in full or in part this will serve to
bring M exico and the United States much closer in their diplom atic
relations.
Please accept the assurances o f our highest consideration.
In the name o f the com m ittee:
(Names om itted.)
T o the Honorable J o h n L i x d ,
C o n fid e n tia l E n v o y o f th e P r e s id e n t
o f th e U n ite d S ta te s o f A m e r ic a .
44915— 13387
o
SHALL THE PEOPLE BE TRICKED OUT
OF THEIR POWER TO RULE?
The warfare o f the allied reactionary corporation and political
interests lo prevent the successful establishment and permanence of
the initiative and referendum in American States and cities has been
directed along four general lin e s :
1. To prevent their introduction at all.
2. To have them declared “ unconstitutional ” by the courts.
.I. To induce legislatures to insert “ jo k e r s ” in proposed amendments
‘
w hich would render them unworkable when secured.
4. T o break them down after they are secured.
In Missouri, fo r example, the legislature has submitted, in the place of
the good one now in force, a substitute amendment, which, i f adopted,
w ill practically kill the initiative and referendum in that State.
REMARKS
OF
OWEN
OF O K LAH O M A
IN' THE
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
AUGUST 20, 1914
PRESENTING A STATEM ENT BY THE
NATIONAL POPULAR GOVERNMENT LEAGUE
ENTITLED
THE NATION -W IDE ATTEM PT TO DESTROY THE
EFFICIENCY OF THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM
W ASHINGTON
1914
SHALL THE PEOPLE PE TRICKED OUT OF THEIR POWER TO RULE?
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, the assaults being made upon the
initiative and referendum throughout the Nation merit the
careful attention of every American citizen who believes in
popular government and genuine majority rule.
Direct legislation is now in operation in 15 States, and its
adoption is a vital issue in many others. Its advance is, of
course, bitterly opposed by the special interests. But not con
tent with combating the further extension of the initiative and
referendum, various corrupting corporations and the corrupt
political machines under their influence or control are deter
mined to destroy these instruments o f self-government in States
which have already secured them.
In Missouri, for example, the legislature has submitted, in
place of the excellent provision now in force, a new substitute
amendment which will, if adopted, practically kill the initiative
and referendum in that State. The people of Missouri are not
aware of the true character of the proposal made to them.
They are being asked to support a deceptive substitute, on
the grounds that it will prohibit the initiative from being ap
plied to the single tax. As a matter of fact, they are being
asked to renounce the sovereign control which they now possess
over the lawmaking function, forfeit the powers they gained
after years of struggle, and once more place the State legislature
in supreme control over themselves.
In Montana the supreme court has recently been asked to in
validate, upon absurd technicalities, an initiative and referen
dum amendment adopted by the people of that State in 1000.
In Arkansas the supreme court has by unfriendly decisions
destroyed a great part of the amendment adopted in 1910.
In Washington the organized farmers and workingmen have
found great difficulty, under the unjust and arbitrary condi
tions imposed by the legislature, in securing petitions for laws
desired by them. Even after petitions have been secured,
the State officials are seemingly making every effort to keep
these questions off the ballot—questions which the special in
terests do not want submitted to the people.
In Oregon an attempt is being made to secure the passage of
a law which will render it almost impossible to secure petitions.
In Colorado Gov. Ammons has declared himself in favor of
inhibitive restrictions. Like attacks might be mentioned in
other States.
Mr. President, the cause o f this sinister warfare against the
people’s new-found liberties is not far to seek. Many laws o f
the highest importance to equalize opportunity, to conserve, pro
tect, and develop human life and human energy are urgently
G8178—13S71
3
IT:
? '
•Mi,
iji|
f
H
needed. Those great objects are to be accomplished by a series
of measures involving social and industrial reforms. There is
in reality a political struggle being waged between the masses
o f the people and the organized forces of human selfishness,
which have systematically glorified the acquisition of property
at the expense o f human life and happiness.
It is the failure o f representative government to give the
people what they want that has caused the people o f several
States to demand and secure the initiative and referendum. A
demand for direct legislation is being made by the people of
every State. This movement the forces o f reaction are deter
mined to overthrow; if not openly, then by betrayal. This is the
explanation of all these amazing attempts to prevent true selfgovernment from being established in this Republic, founded
upon the principle o f the sovereignty o f the people. This is why
men who claim to reverence Thomas Jefferson and Abraham
Lincoln bend their energies to subvert and annihilate methods
o f government which embody the very essence o f every principle
for which those great exponents of government by the people
stood. I deem it a public duty to expose upon the floor o f the
Senate this attack upon popular government, and I desire to
insert as a part of my remarks a statement upon this subject
prepared by the National Popular Government League, of this
city, which sets forth in detail the methods now being employed
to destroy the initiative and referendum and block the efforts
of the American people to attain true political liberty.
If there is no objection, I should like to insert that in my
remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. P it t m a n in the chair).
.Without objection, it will be so ordered.
The matter referred to is as follows:
TH E
N A T IO N -W ID E
A T T E M P T T O D E S T R O Y T H E E F F IC IE N C Y
T IV E AND R E F E R E N D U M .
OF T H E
IN IT IA
A statement prepared by Judson King, executive secretary of
the National Popular Government League, and individually re
viewed, accepted, and approved by the following officers o f the
league:
P resid en t: Hon. R obert L. O w en , United States Senator. Oklahoma.
Vice presid en ts: Charles S. Barrett, Union City, Ga., president Na
tional Farmers’ Union ; Hon. G eorge E. C h a m b e r l a in , United S ta tes
Senator, Oregon : Hon. M o s e s E. C l a p p , United States Senator. Min
nesota ; Samuel Gompers. Washington, D. C., president American Federa
tion o f L a b o r; Dr. John U. Haynes. Los Angeles, father direct legisla
tion in C a lifo rn ia : C. 15. Kegley. I’ alouse, Wash., president National
Conference o f Progressive State G ran ges; Hon. M. C lyde K e l l y , Con
gressman, Pennsylvania : John P. White, Indianapolis, president United
Mine W orkers o f America.
Of the finance com m ittee: George P. Hampton, chairman, New York,
secretary Farmers’ National Committee on Popular Governm n t ; Hon.
W il l ia m
E. C h i l t o n , United States Senator, W est V irg in ia ; Carl
Sehurz Yrooman, Bloom ington, 111., author “ American railway prob
lems.”
Of the executive com m ittee: Hon. Frank P. Walsh, chairman, Kansas
City, Mo., chairman Federal Commission on Industrial R elations: P rof.
Lewis J. Johnson, Cambridge, Mass., civil engineering. Harvard Uni
versity ; Dr. A. J. M cKelway, W ashington, D. C.. southern secretary
National Child Labor C om m ittee; Hon. G eorge W. N o r r is , United
States Senator, Nebraska ; the president and executive secretary o f the
league.
O f the comm ittee on legislative fo r m s : W illiam S. U’Ren. chairman,
Oregon City. Orcg., father o f the “ Oregon system ’’ : Hon. R o b e r t
C rosser , Congressman, chairman initiative and referendum committee,
Ohio constitutional c o n v en tion ; Hon. Joseph W. Folk, W ashington,
D. C., ex-governor o f Missouri, solicitor Interstate Commerce Commis58178— 13S71
s io n ; Francis J. Ileney, San Francisco, attorney at 'law ; Stiles P. Jones,
M inneapolis, secretary tlie Voters L ea g u e; Dean W illiam Draper Lewis,
Philadelphia, law school U niversity o f P ennsylvania: Dr. Charles
M cCarthy, Madison, W is„ director legislative reference lib r a r y ; M ilton
T. U’ Ren, San Francisco, attorney at l a w ; Delos F. W ilcox, Ph. D.,
New York, consulting franchise expert, author “ Government by all the
people.”
The warfare of the reactionary allied corporation and po
litical interests to prevent the successful establishment of con
stitutional amendments and statute laws for the initiative and
referendum in American States and cities has been directed
along four general lines:
F IR S T .
TO
P R E V E N T 't
h e ir
IN T R O D U C T IO N
AT
A LL.
It took 10 years o f strenuous fighting in Oregon to secure direct legis
lation, 12 years in M issouri, 18 years in Ohio, etc. A fter 22 years of
effort since the popular demand began, only 17 States have amendments,
such as they are.
SEC O N D . T O H A V E T H E M
D EC LA RED
rc
U N C O N S T IT U T IO N A L
”
B Y C O U RTS.
The Morgan interests carried a case to the Supreme Court o f the
United States in an effort to have the Oregon amendment— and hence
all amendments— declared “ repugnant to the Federal C onstitution.”
The court decided in 1911 that it was a political question fo r Congress
to determine. And Congress has kept hands off. A ttacks o f like char
acter have been made in nearly all State supreme courts.
T H I R D . T O IN D U C E L E G I S L A T U R E S
A M EN D M EN TS
W H IC H
W O ULD
SEC U R ED .
TO I N S E R T " J O K E R S ”
IN
P R O P O SED
REN D ER
TH EM
U N W O R K A B LE
W HEN
Of the 17 amendments adopted, only 8 can be called r/ood. And
there are only 4 honest, adequate, complete systems in operation to-dav.
The rest are all defective at vital points, and some are absolutely
worthless. Six proposed amendments will be voted on November 3,
1914. F our o f these are worthless.
F O U R T H . TO B R E A K
TH EM
DO W N A F T E R
TH EY
A R E E S T A B L IS H E D .
An account o f attacks o f this character is the subject o f this writing.
In nearly every State which has direct legislation the interests are con
stantly at work to destroy them or prevent their use on vital issues.
The courts are appealed to, the legislatures arc seduced, and even the
people themselves are asked— not to repeal the initiative and referen
dum, the interests are too clever fo r that, but to vote for innocentlooking changes in the amendments which w ill deprive the people o f
practical power to control the lawmaking function o f their govern
ment.
It is these “ jo k e r s ” which shear the voters o f their power and
against them all cham pions o f government by the people should be on
their guard. An abortive initiative and referendum is worse than none
at all.
M IS S O U R I.
One of the cleverest attempts to deprive tlie people of a great
State of the powers they now possess under the initiative and
referendum is furnished just now by Missouri.
In 1912 an amendment to tlie State constitution proposing a
mild application o f tlie principle o f the single tax was placed
upon the ballot by initiative petition, and. after one of the most
bitter and sensational campaigns of its kind ever known in the
State, was defeated by a vote o f 508,137 against to SG.G47 for.
The total vote for governor was 099,210; hence S5.1 per cent
voted on the proposition. So great was the opposition to tlie
measure that a very considerable demand was made upon the
legislature to make it impossible for the single tax to be again
initiated. That teas all. There was no demand from the people
that the use of the initiative and referendum on other questions
be impaired or prohibited.
The legislature of 1913 submitted an entire substitute initia
tive and referendum section to be voted upon at the general
election, November 3, 1914, which contains a clause prohibiting
58178— 13871
I
6
the initiative and referendum from being applied to the single
ta x; but it did not stop with this.
Several other new provisions were inserted which, if adopted,
will render it easy to stop the use of the initiative and referen
dum on any subject whatever which may meet with any power
ful opposition.
TH E
O P E N R E S T R IC T IO N ,
What might be called the antisingle-tax section is as follows:
The powers reserved or contained in this section as aforesaid shall not
he used to pass a law or constitutional amendment authorizing any
classification o f property for the purpose o f levying the different rates
o f taxation thereon, or of authorizing the levy o f jyiy single tax on
land or land values or land sites at a higher rate or by a different
rule than is or m sy be applied to im provements thereon, or to personal
property, or to authorize or confer local option or other local powers in
matters o f taxation in or upon any o f the counties, m unicipalities, or
political subdivisions o f the State, or to repeal, amend, or m odify these
provisions relating to taxation.
This is a remarkable proposition.
Not only are the siugletaxers tied up tight, but everyone else,
no matter how hostile to the single tax. The principle of prop
erty classification is not the single tax, but is urged by bitter
antisingletaxers. The principle o f home rule in taxation is not
the single tax. Even the Supreme Court of the United States,
which can not be said even to have single-tax leanings, declared
(Pacific Express Co. v. Seibert, 142 U. S. llepts., 351) :
A system which imposes the same tax upon every species o f property,
Irrespective o f its nature or condition or class, will be destructive o f the
principle o f uniform ity and equality in taxation, and o f a ju st adapta
bility.
TEOPLE POWERLESS TO CHANGE THIS.
The people are thus asked to surrender any practical control
over the function of taxation; but, what is more, they are spe
cifically cut off from ever recovering control if they so desire.
They can not use the initiative and referendum to “ amend, re
peal, or modify these provisions relating to taxation.” I f the
old adage be true, that the power to tax he the power to govern,
then a more humiliating proposition was never presented to a
free citizenship.
O T H E R R U IN O U S P R O V IS IO N S A P P L Y IN G
TO A L L P E T I T I O N S .
But this is not the most important thing. Let us examine
further. Another new provision, the conditions of which are
in another place repeated so as to a p p ly a lso to t h e r e fe r e n d u m ,
reads:
Initiative petitions shall he filed with the respective county clerks o f
the respective counties in which the signers thereof reside and vote not
less than fou r months before the election at whicli they are to be voted
upon. W i t h i n 3 0 d a y s after said petitions are filed with the respective
county clerks o f the respective counties said initiative petitions shall
be. by said respective county clerks, laid before the county courts o f the
respective counties, and said petitions shall be examined by the respec
tive county courts o f the respective counties, and i f t h e s i g n a t u r e s
th e r e to a r e fo u n d to b e g e n u in e s ig n a tu r e s o f v o te r s o f su ch c o u n tie s ,
t h e y s h a l l , a t l e a s t t h r e e m o u t h s b e f o r e t h e e l e c t i o n at which they are
to be voted upon, be certified by the respective county courts o f the re
spective counties to the secretary o f state.
This seemingly innocent section when coupled up with an
other provision “ that petitions must be secured—S per cent for
the initiative and 5 per cent for the referendum— iu each o f at
least two-thirds of the congressional districts in the State,” can
easily be made an insurmountable obstacle to the use of the in
itiative aud referendum.
5817S— 13S71
Now, watch carefully! All petitions must be in the hands of
county clerks four months before the election. That means in
3914, say, on July 3, with the election on November 3. But
the clerk may hold these petitions for 30 days before turning
them over to the county court. He can hold them till August
1 to 3, all petitions tiled from July 1 to 3. Now, August 3 is
the date on which all petitions must be in the hands of the
secretary of state at Jefferson City— that is, “ three months be
fore the election ” — after being examined and certified by the
county courts. It would be a physical impossibility for the
county court to do all this for all petitions filed late in June
or early in July, and the history of similar petitions filed in
States all over the Union shows that a goodly portion of such
petitions are filed shortly before or on the final date set. And
even if the people should file their petitions earlier, the power
of the county clerk to hold them 30 days would still be a menace
and could cause thousands of names to fail to reach the sec
retary of state in time.
The county court could easily refuse to certify a petition
to the secretary of state on the grounds that it had not had
time to examine the genuineness of the signatures.
It is perfectly clear then, that any petition opposed by a
small number only of county clerics or county courts mould have
no possible chance to get through, and these officials icould all
act mitliin their constitutional rights and could not be touched.
U N P R E C E D E N T E D T O V .'E R O V ER P E T I T I O N S G IV E N T H E C O U R T S .
But more dangerous still is the unprecedented power given the
courts to reject at will not only single-tax petitions but all
other petitions of the people. The text says petitions shall be
certified by the county courts “ if the signatures thereto shall be
found to be genuine signatures of voters o f such counties” This
is the first instance where it has been provided not only that
genuine signatures must first actually be obtained, but that they
are then of no avail until proved genuine signatures of voters
before a judicial officer— the first time signatures authorized to
be procured by law are presumed to be false until found genuine
by the courts.
That this provision would absolutely kill every petition passed
upon by an unfriendly court can not be denied. The language
is plain; the effect is clear. The examination by the court and
the passing upon the signatures by the court, and its finding
them to be genuine, is one of the prerequisite steps of a valid
petition. Further, the amendment could not be aided by judicial
construction because it is a fundamental condition on which a
law can be initiated or referred.
In other States, and in Missouri now, the oath of the one se
curing the petitions that they are genuine signatures of voters
is sufficient to establish validity, and such petitions are pre
sumed genuine unless they are proven to be otherwise.
But in this provision the little word “ i f s h i f t s the burden of
proof to the other side. It is not too much to say that a judge
desiring to strictly comply with the requirements laid down
could compel, oy would have to compel, every man signing a
petition to come into court and prove to the satisfaction of the
court both that his signature was genuine and that he was a
legal voter o f the county. Unquestionably, an intolerable bur58178—13871
I
8
den is here placed upon the judges which is undesirable to them»
and one which it is inexpedient and unwise to place upon them.
This provision, if carried out, could and would cause the re
jection of all petitions, because it is practically impossible for a
judge to examine into the genuineness o f all the signatures of
his county. I f the judge were friendly to the initiated measure
he might assume to pass upon the signatures without an exami
nation, but if unfriendly he would simply say, “ I am unable to
tind the signatures ‘ genuine signatures of voters of such coun
ties,’ ” and what then? There is no method prescribed for re
viewing the judge’s conduct. It being a judicial act, the judge
can not be compelled, by mandamus or otherwise, to find the
signatures “ genuine signatures of voters of such counties.”
Had this section been simply an effort to have questionable
signatures passed upon it would have provided that within the
30 days anyone could present to the court evidence of the
falsity of signatures questioned, and then the court would have
to pass upon only the questioned signatures instead of the un
questioned ones as well. If the court had to pass only upon the
genuineness of the signatures, he might take the testimony of
those of actual voters of his county. Think of a county judge
examining into the fact as to whether every signer of a petition
is a voter.
If the courts, acting clearly within the powers thus granted,
could easily throw out petitions which were genuine, consider
with how much greater ease they could decline to certify a peti
tion on which a few illegal or doubtful names appeared. It is
always a simple matter for those opposing a petition to “ job ” a
solicitor, no matter how honest he may be, and get fraudulent
names upon a petition. Judges could hold the whole petition
incompetent because o f a few bad signatures, no matter how
genuine all the rest o f the petition might be. The whole pro
vision is comparable only to one which might prescribe that no
man's vote upon a measure could bc-counted until first passed
upon bp the courts.
E S P E C IA L L Y
IIA R D
FO R
XUE
FA R M ERS.
The farmers have made active use of the initiative and
referendum in nearly every one of the 15 States where it is in
operation. They will want to do so in Missouri. The above
provisions will make it harder for them to secure valid peti
tions even than for town people. For example, the organized
farmers of the State of Washington this year initiated seven
laws of tremendous value to them, which were rejected by the
legislature. They appointed a joint legislative committee to
manage the work o f securing the seven petitions, and found it
a difficult matter. Think of the additional money, anxiety, and
trouble it would cost the committee, under the proposed Mis
souri conditions, to watch all the county clerks and the county
courts to see if they were properly attending to petitions after
they had been filed. The farmers would be helpless against
hostile county courthouse “ rings,” and the rings be protected
by the constitution itself. And, then, if they were blocked in
just 1 district out o f the necessary 11. the whole Stale petition
would fail, even if all the voters in the othes 10 districts had
signed the petition.
58178— 13871
9
T IE S UP T H E rr.O P L E FOR S I X TEARS.
It is also provided that any law or amendment to the State
constitution rejected by a vote of the people can not be resub
mitted by petition for a period of five years. This means six
years, since Missouri has biennial elections. The provision
reads:
When any measure shall have been submitted to the people for their
approval u n der th e p ow ers r e s c i n d or c en to l e d in this s ec tio n , as
aforesaid, and shall be rejected bv the people, neither the same measure
nor any other measure which shall have or tend to h a re the same mean
ing, nor any other measure which shall have or tend to have the same
or similar effect as the measure rejected, shall again he submitted under
th e said p o w ers reserve d or con ta in ed in this s ectio n for a term of live
years.
to
On first blush this is ostensibly inserted to prevent the early
resubmission of a defeated initiative measure. A law or consti
tutional amendment rejected in 1914 could not be again pre
sented till 1920, then 192G, and so forth, nor could anything
which a court might say “ tended in that direction ” be submit
ted. An emergency might arise, conditions might change, delay
might mean millions o f dollars lest; the people might desire
to ^ct in 191G or 1918, but they could not until 1920.
IN C L U D E S T H E
REFEREN D U M
A LSO .
But this provision goes far deeper. It is so worded as to
apply to the referendum as well as the initiative. The phrase
“ powers reserved or contained in this section ” includes the
referendum.
An amazing limitation on the people is here disclosed which
can best be set forth by an example. Suppose the legislature
should enact an unpopular law—make some huge appropriation,
create some special privilege, give away a railway franchise, or
do anything which might be strongly opposed by the people?
Suppose a referendum petition is filed and the act is rejected
by an enormous majority. The very next session of the legis
lature could enact that exact law—or one like it—and the peo
ple could not vote on the question for six years.
A
C O N F IS C A T IO N
OF
TH E
P E O P L E 'S
PO W ER.
To sum up, what the people of Missouri who vote for
this amendment think they are doing is to prevent an
other submission of the single tax.
W hat they really will be doing is:
1. To place in the hands of a few county officials power
to prevent the people’ s use of the initiative and refer
endum on any subject.
2 . To surrender their present control of the taxation
machinery of the State and hand it over to the legis
lature.
3.
To fix this legislative control in the constitution irre
vocably so that the people can never change or recover it.
, 4 . To deny to all the people for six years the use of
either the initiative or referendum on the subject matter
of any measure once rejected by popular vote.
, 5 . To give the legislature absolute power to imme
diately reenact its own laws which the people have rejected
through the referendum.
When closely examined, therefore, and its “ sleepers” pointed
out, the people o f Missouri are asked in this substitute to vote
to curtail and destroy their own legislative powers and to
solemnly announce by their votes that they can not trust them58178— 13871
•
selves with the instruments of self-government, which they
now possess, but must return to the old conditions of being
controlled instead of remaining their own masters as at pres
ent. If this substitute carries, it will be the first time in
American history when the people by their own act have de
liberately deprived themselves of popular sovereignty.
It is unthinkable that a majority of the members of the
Missouri Legislature who voted for this substitute were cor
rectly informed as to the true significance of the changes pro
posed, as there are many members who are strong supporters
of direct legislation.
W HO IS
HAC K OF T H I S
SC H EM E?
The whole situation is a pleasing prospect indeed—to the
reactionary interest. The railroads, the brewery interests, the
franchise grabbers, the wealthy tax dodgers, and, in short, all
forms of “ special privilege” opposed to the people and who
hate the initiative and referendum with an undying hatred,
have now their golden opportunity. They know exactly what
they are about. Taking advantage of the resentment aroused
by the submission of the unpopular single-tax proposal they
hope to carry this new substitute amendment and so “ ham
string” the initiative and referendum itself. If the people of
Missouri fall in with this scheme, they will find their hands
completely tied on any practical use of the initiative and refer
endum in the future.
The great mass of the voters do not know this. In truth,
proposed measures are so inadequately published in Missouri
that not more than one-third o f the voters will ever see the
text of this substitute.
Every citizen of Missouri who believes in Democracy and the
rule of the people should awake to the fact that the passage of
this amendment would destroy his fundamental political rights,
won after years o f struggle. It would place Missouri in the
column of reactionary States.
Talk about the danger of the single tax is without point.
The people o f Missouri did not want it and voted it down
almost unanimously. It is absurd, therefore, to ask this same
people to indorse a proposition which implies that they are unfit
for self-government and unable to use the initiative and refer
endum.
Hence, the question before the people o f Missouri is not
whether they want to vote on the single tax, but whether they
want to retain the power to vote upon anything.
Here is what some leading public men in Missouri and else
where think about the value of the initiative and referendum:
GOV. E L L I O T T
W.
M A JO R .
Gov. Elliott W. Major, when he was attorney general of
Missouri, filed a brief for the initiative and referendum before
the United States Supreme Court, in which he argues strongly
against the attempt to declare these measures unconstitutional,
and he said that they were the distinguishing right o f the people
under a republican form o f government.
GOV. H E R B E R T S . H A D L E T .
In his message to the Forty-ninth General Assembly o f Mis
souri, Gov. Hadley said:
I believe that, on the whole, the initiative and referendum in our
constitution has been beneficial. Some persons have urged that the
58178— 12871
requirements fo r initiating laws or amendments to the constitution
should bo made more difficult. I do not agree with this suggestion
and I recommend that the law stand unchanged.
GOV. J O S E P H
W . F O L K ., NO W A T T O R N E Y F O R T H E
C O M M IS S IO N .
IN T E R S T A T E
C O M M ERC E
Ex-Gov. Folk, In Ills address before the National Popular
Government League in Washington, D. C., on December G 1013,
,
strongly condemned this attempt to kill the initiative and ref
erendum in Missouri:
I f the opponents o f the initiative and referendum succeed in hob
bling it with this proposed amendment in this respect—-
Taxation—
the next step, o f course, will be to hobble it in some other respect, and
directly take away from the people the power to vote on some other
question. This, t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e o t h e r c h a n g e s m a d e b y t h e n c r o p r o
p o s a l, lea d s
r e fe r en d u m .
to
th e
p r a c tic a l
repeal
or
a b o litio n
of
th e
in itia tiv e
and
I hope the people o f M issouri will not be misled into giv
ing up this power that they now have in their hands and the obtaining
o f which has taken 14 years o f political struggle. I f they tie their
hands now from voting on something they do not want, they will find
themselves powerless in the future to secure something they do want.
We want in this country not only good government, we want selfgovernment. Wo might have good government under a k in g ; we might
have so-called good government, though all o f us be slaves. As between
good government w ithout self-governm ent and bad government with
self-governm ent, I would prefer the latter.
The initiative and referendum are the tools o f self-governm ent, and
when the people have these in their hands they can make the Govern
ment just as good as they wish to make it or just as bad as they suffer
it to become. The kind o f government this movement for better things
demands is that which comes through governing ourselves.
E X -P R E S ID E N T TH EO D O R E R O O SE V E LT.
In his public addresses and in the platform of the Progressive
Party, Theodore Roosevelt has repeatedly urged the initiative
and referendum as necessary instruments in the hands of tlie
people to maintain self-government.
IIO N .
W IL L IA M
J E N N IN G S
BRYA N .
This great Democratic leader has for IS years been an active
advocafe for the initiative and referendum. In a letter written
July 15, 11)14, urging the voters of Mississippi to adopt a pend
ing amendment providing for these powers, he said:
I regard the initiative and referendum the greatest modern im prove
ment in strengthening representative government.
P R E S ID E N T
WOODROW W IL S O N .
In his book, “ The New Freedom,” in chapter 10, entitled
“ The way to resume,” the President said:
■ I
¥
Back o f all reform lies the method o f getting it—
And then he pointed out that the initiative and referendum
were necessary instruments in the hands of the people to secure
these reforms. They are the key that opens the door to our
legislative house. He then says:
The initiative is a means o f seeing to it that measures which the
people want shall be passed when legislatures defy or ignore public
opinion. The referendum is a means o f seeing to it that the unrepre
sentative measures which they do not want shall not be placed upon
the statute book.
OREGON.
The notable things accomplished by the people o f Oregon
through tlie initiative and referendum have been heralded to
the Nation. It is not generally known that since their adoption
in 11K the people of Oregon have been engaged in a constant
)2
struggle to preserve these legislative powers against repeated
58178— 13871
II
12
attacks by the enemies of popular sovereignty. The struggle is
still on.
The first attack was made by the State legislature o f 1903
in an attempt to virtually set aside the referendum by declar
ing the • emergency clause” upon laws the politicians did not
“
wish to go to the people. The then governor, Hon. G eorge G.
C h a m b e r l a i n , now United States Senator from Oregon, being
a genuine friend of popular government saw the danger and
promptly met the issue by sending such bills back with a sting
ing veto. His messages roused the State, and it is now dan
gerous for any member to “ trifle” with the emergency clause.
In 1900 the State grange initiated a law taxing the tele
graph, telephone, and express companies upon their gross in
comes. They were at that time practically untaxed. The bill
was adopted by the people. The Morgan interests refused to
pay the tax, and took this as a test case to the Supreme Court
o f the United States in an effort to have the Oregon initiative
and referendum declared “ unconstitutional,” and so kill the
movement in the entire Nation. They failed, but the struggle
was a costly and harrowing one to the people.
At every session of the legislature laws or changes in the
amendments are introduced calculated to “ pull its teeth.” For
example, in 1910 the legislature proposed a new constitutional
convention. The evident scheme was to fix up a new consti
tution in which all the new popular-government provisions
would be either abolished or rendered inoperative. A hard
campaign ensued, and it was rejected by the people.
In 1910 an amendment was submitted to the people to require
measures to receive a majority o f “ all votes cast in the elec
tion ” to enact measures instead of a majority o f the votes cast
on the question, as at present. It took a vigorous campaign to
defeat this joker.
At the present time a new amendment is proposed which will
prohibit the employment o f solicitors to. secure petitions.. Need
less to say, this attempt is meeting with the strong opposition
of all organizations and men who know from actual experience
what it means to get petitions and what a blow this would prove
to the successful use o f the initiative and referendum, as it
has already proven in the State of Washington.
ID A H O AND U T A H .
By a vote of 43,65S to 13,490, the people o f Idaho placed in
their constitution at the election of 1912 what they supposed
was an initiative and referendum amendment. It contained
several jokers, but, worst o f all, was not made self-executing.
It provided that the legislature should draft laws, filling in
details and putting it into effect. The legislature of 1913, in
defiance o f the direct mandate o f the people, refused to pass
such legislation. This is a repetition o f the same fraud which
was practiced upon the people of Utah since 1900. The “ gen
eral principle” was put in the constitution, and for 14 years
the people have waited in vain for the legislature to put the
Initiative and referendum in action. No legislature should he
perm itted to fix by law the conditions upon which the people
m ay review its acts.
W A S H IN G T O N .
The voters of Washington adopted the initiative and referen
dum at the general election of 1912. It was a defective amend58178— 13871
13
merit. Among other* things, it failed to provide for the use of
the initiative on amendments to the State constitution. Gov.
Hay’s opposition to the constitutional initiative defeated him
for reelection. The legislature met iir January, 1913, and under
the guise of “ safeguarding ’’ the amendment, deliberately
passed an enabling act which needlessly placed severe handicaps
upon the people in any use of the initiative and referendum. It
is made a “ gross misdemeanor ” for a busy citizen to aid a
petition in which he is interested by hiring a solicitor to secure
signatures. Only names o f voters who are actually upon the last
registration lists can be counted on petitions, and so on.
On July 3, after a heroic struggle, the State Farmers’ Grange,
the State Farmers’ Union, the State Federation of Labor, and
the Direct Legislation League, acting under the direction of a
joint legislative committee, succeeded in surmounting the ob
stacles and tiled petitions for seven laws—“ the seven sisters ” —■
of great importance to the common people but undesired by the
politicians and the interests. Miss Lucy It. Case, of Seattle, a
most able woman and secretary of the committee, gave her
entire time for six months, without pay, to the work of secur
ing this petition. But even then the petition cost $1,281.93.
Thirty-one thousand eight hundred and thirty-six names were
necessary; 35,000 were secured and properly certified to before
the county registers, where they were signed.
The interests opposed to these laws organized a “ Stop, Look,
Listen League,” and spent thousands of dollars in paid news
paper advertising and otherwise in an attempt to frighten the
people away from signing petitions. They are now bending
every energy in an attempt to prevent the questions from going
on the ballot. In this they evidently have the support of the
State administration. The law requires the secretary of state
simply to count the signatures certified to by the'county au
thorities, and if sufficient, he is requix*ed to place the questions
on the ballot. Instead of this Secretary Howell assumes juris
diction upon the genuineness o f the signatures and is putting
the State to a frightful expense to verify work already done,
llis every move is hostile and the seeming intent is, upon one
pretext or another, to throw out enough names to cause the
principal petitions to fail.
The attorney general, Mr. Tanner, makes the unheard-of
“ ruling” that during the 30 days given the secretary of state
by law to count the names citizens can withdraw their names;
and blanks for that purpose have been prepared in the office of
the secretary of state. But no new names can be added. The
“ Stop, Look, Listen League ’’ is scouring the State to induce men
to withdraw their names, and at this writing (July 27) it is
doubtful if the farmers’ important laws will go on the ballot.
But whatever the outcome, this experience of the people of
Washington serves as a warning to other States to watch “ en
abling a cts” closely. It further shows the bitter hostility of
reactionary politicians and corporations to permitting the people
expressing their will on important laws. Mr. C. B. Kegley, of
Palouse, Wash., master o f the State Grange, strongly opposes the
law prohibiting responsible organizations and citizens from em
ploying solicitors, thus enabling the volunteer work to be sup
plemented by men who can give their entire attention to secur
ing petitions in a crisis.
58178— 13871
A RKA N SA S.
Iii Arkansas tlie opponents o f the initiative, referendum, and
recall have met with success in their efforts to devitalize the
amendment through the decisions of a supreme court hostile to
these instruments of popular government.
The original amendment adopted in 1910 read:
The legislative power o f this State shall be vested in a general as
sembly, * * * but the people o f each m unicipality, each county,
and o f the State reserve to themselves power to propose laws and
amendments to the constitution and to enact or reject the same at the
polls—
And so forth.
It is perfectly evident that this is a bungling attempt to
establish both the local and State-wide initiative and referen
dum in one short clause, so adored by constitutional lawyers.
In fact, the words “ o f each municipality, of each county, and
of the State ” were inserted in the original draft as an amend
ment to accomplish this purpose, and not, as was claimed in the
campaign, to permit the cities to override the State constitu
tion.
Nevertheless the supreme court declared itself unable to
discover what the language meant, and so abolished the whole
clause, which took from the people their constitutional right of
initiative and referendum in counties and cities. Exit the local
initiative and referendum!
Next, the legislature of 3913 passed a law under the “ emer
gency clause” and thus denied a referendum petition upon it
on the grounds that it was “ necessary for the immediate pres
ervation of the public peace, health, and safety,” but also pro
vided that the law should not go into effect for one year. The
supreme court upheld the legality of this action. Hence, exit
the referendum!
Next, in 1912 the people passed an amendment by initiative
petition establishing the recall on all public officers, including
judges. Also two other amendments. ■
Now, the constitution adopted in 1S74 provided that the
legislature could submit only three amendments at any one
election. The initiative and referendum amendment adopted
in 1910—3G years later—did not disturb the old system, but
made no limitations on the number of amendments the people
might submit by petition.
At the 1912 election the legislature submitted proposed amend
ments No. 11 and No. 12. The people submitted No. 13. limit
ing the legislative session to G days. No. 14 provided for the
O
recall o f all elective officials, including judges; also No. 15.
All three of the initiate amendments were adopted by large
majorities. The election board refused to certify the adoption
o f Nos. 14 and 15, on the grounds that they were illegally
submitted.
Suit was brought, and the supreme court solemnly decided
that limitation of three, adopted in 1874, governed the amend
ment of 1910, and that amendments 14 and 15 must fall. This is
a complete reversal of the universal rule o f construction that the
last enactment governs and repeals older enactments in conflict.
But by this means the recall was destroyed. Hereafter the
legislature can prevent the submission o f any amendment by
initiative of the people by filling up the ballot with three amend
ments o f whatever nature. Exit the constitutional initiative!
08178— 13871
I
15
And at the present time it is given to this supreme court to
decide whether the people will have the right to vote at the
November election upon a bank-guaranty law and a law estab
lishing a State mining board and insure safety for miners.
These laws have been propei-ly initiated and promptly enjoined
from going on the ballot by the bankers and mine owners.
O H IO .
Ohio adopted the initiative and referendum in 1912. Gross
frauds were practiced by the special interests in 1913 in an at
tempt to secure referendum petitions upon two statutes. These
frauds were widely heralded in the press and were made the
basis of a demand by these same special interests for a law
prohibiting solicitors for petitions to receive compensation. To
secure from G0,000 to 125,000 signatures of legal voters upon
petitions, as required in Ohio, is a gigantic task, and few peti
tions could be secured by volunteer work alone.
The friends of direct legislation in the legislature and outside
promptly met the issue, a campaign of education was made, the
help of the administration was secured, and a law preventing
fraudulent securing of petitions was passed, but not the thing
desired by the enemies of popular government.
The citizens of Toledo are engaged in a life and death strug
gle with the public-utility interests over a street car franchise
worth $25,000,000. These interests are now carrying a case
to the Supreme Court in an attempt to have the municipal
initiative and referendum law of the State declared “ unconsti
tutional,” and so deprive ihe people of a vote upon the settlement
of this important question.
O KLA H O M A .
One of the most vital provisions of a direct-legislation system
is adequate publicity upon pending measures for the informa
tion of the voters. Oregon lias the best method. A neat State
pamphlet containing copies of the measures, with their ballot
titles, and also explanatory arguments for and against, fur
nished by citizens or organizations o f citizens, is mailed from
the office of the secretary of state direct to the voters 00 days
before election. In Oklahoma, however, the legislature has
failed to provide for any arguments from citizens, and the sys
tem of distribution is fatally defective. It is supposed to be
handed to the voters at the primary election by election offi
cials. On any vital measure opposed by the machines this is not
done adequately. Probably not more than one-third of the
voters ever see the pamphlet. Another vital defect in the Okla
homa system is the requirement that measures, to be adopted,
must receive a majority o f all votes cast “ in said election ”
instead of “ a majority of all votes cast thereon.”
TE N D IN G A M E N D M E N T S.
At the general election November 3, 3914, proposed constitu
tional amendments for the initiative and referendum will be
voted upon in five States, as follow s:
Texas: Petitions must be signed by 20 per cent of the voters
for both initiative and referendum. This is preposterous. No
State should require over 8 per cent, and in no case more than
50,000 signatures for the initiative; nor more than 5 per cent,
and in no case more than 30,000 for the referendum. The
amendment is not self-executing and all other details must be
58178— 13871
16
provided by the legislature. It is tlie Utah and Idaho trick all
over again. The adoption of this subterfuge would kill the
movement in Texas for years: .
Minnesota: The Minnesota amendment is so full of jokers
and restrictions that space does not permit even an attempt at
discussion. One provision actually gives the legislature specific
power to prohibit the circulation of petitions on any subject it
sees fit.
Wisconsin: Submits a conservative but fairly good amendment,
which it will be worth while to adopt.
North Dakota: Amendment lacks the constitutional initiative,
requires too large petitions, and has a wicked “ distributing”
clause for petitions. There are other jokers. Not worth adopt
ing.
Maryland votes upon an amendment providing for the refer
endum only. It is in very good shape. The people, however,
are prohibited from referring any liquor law.
Ioxca: An amendment was passed in 1913, which, if adopted
by the legislature of 1915, will be voted on in 1916. Among the
numerous jokers which render it worthless may be mentioned
the right given the legislature to fix petitions at anywhere from
12 to 22 per cent for the initiative, and from 10 to 20 per cent
for the referendum. Worthless.
This statement is by no means a complete account of the un
warranted and unjustifiable attacks made upon the initiative
and referendum in States and cities where they are established.
The few examples given illustrate the general tendency and
demonstrate beyond question that strenuous efforts are being
made to destroy the initiative and referendum in America, and
that the most dangerous forms which the opposition takes are,
first, to insert stealthy “ jok ers” in these provisions which un
expectedly operate at critical junctures against the exercise of
direct legislative powers by the people; and, second, to break
them down in the courts.
One o f the most important functions o f the National Popular
Government League (nonpartisan) is to point out these
“ jo k e rs” and warn the people against them. The league main
tains a bureau of information and its headquarters are at 1017
Munsey Building, Washington, D. C., where accurate informa
tion concerning these matters can be had freely upon application
to the executive secretary.
58178— 13S71
o
THE PREVIOUS QUESTION -LIMITATION
OF DEBATE—CLOTURE
SPEECH
HON. ROBERT L. OWEN
O JP
OKLAHOM A
IN
THB
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
FEBRUARY 13, 1915.
W A S H IN G T O N
1915
81722— 14548
:
'i
81722— 14548
3
-v
*
)
■ W
,
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, during the Inst two years, sin j)
March, 1913, the Senate o f the United States has had one im
portant measure after another brought before it for considera
tion by the Democratic administration. There was a prolonged
and obvious filibuster in the Senate dealing with the tariff bid.
In order probably to prevent any action upon the Federal re
serve bill, there was a resolute filibuster even on the question o f
allowing a water supply for the city o f San Francisco; thero
was a filibuster, using that bill as a general buffer against pro
posed progressive legislation, which made it necessary in han
dling that bill, as well as in handling the tariff bill and the
Federal reserve act, for the Senate to meet in the morning andi
to run until 11 o’clock at night. We had no vacation during the
summer o f 1913 or during the summer of 1914, because of the
vicious filibustering of the Republican Senators. If this method
o f filibustering shall remain as a practice of the Senate
o f the United States, obviously the Congress of the United
States must remain in continuous session from one year’s end
to another in order to accomplisl even a slight part o f what is
desired by the people of the 'Suited States, and in order in some
small degree to enact the important measures which are pre
sented to the Senate for consideration on favorable reports
from the committees of the Senate.
I call attention to the large calendar which we have, a cal
endar o f some thirty-odd pages, representing hundreds o f meas
ures of importance, which \\c never arrive a t; and even aside
from the calendar there are matters of the greatest possible im
portance, which are not being considered by the body and not
being presented by the committees, because it is well known
that to make reports upon them would be perfectly useless In
view of this now apparently well-established custom of a con
tinuous filibuster against everything desired by the majority
party.
This practice of filibustering has not been confined to one side
of the Chamber only. I agree with the Senator from Nebraska
fMr. N o r r is 1 that the filibuster quickly passes from one side of
the Chamber to the other as an exigency may arise, according
to the desire o f those who may be on either side of the aisle. I
submit, however, a filibuster favoring the people is not to be
compared to filibuster against the people, although an unjusti
fiable parliamentary procedure, except under very extraordinary
conditions.
\-v
The Senate had under consideration the motion by the Senator from
Missouri [M r. R ee d ] to amend Rule X X I I with the amendment pend
ing thereto.
4
It tins been offered as a criticism o f my view with regard
C a cloture rule for the Senate, that on one occasion—March 4,
o
1911—when the question arose with regard to the admission
of New Mexico to statehood with a corporation-wiitten constitu
tion and an unaiuendabie constitution, and the prevention of
Arizona at the same time being admitted to statehood. I did
not hesitate to use the practice of the Senate to filibuster in
order to compel a vote of the Senate jointly upon the admission
of Arizona and New Mexico. My use of this bad practice to
serve the people does not in any wise change my opinion about
the badness of the practice of permitting a filibuster. I acted
within the practice, but I think the practice is indefensible, and
I illustrated its vicious character by coercing the Senate and
compelling it to yield to my individual will.
No one man, no matter how sincere he may be or how patri
otic his purpose, should be permitted to take the floor of the
Senate and keep the floor against the will of every man in the
Senate except himself, and coerce and intimidate the Senate.
To do so is to destroy the most important principle of selfgovernment—the right o f majority rule.
- I wish to submit a brief sketch of what has been the rule with
regard to “ the previous question.’’ It is an old rule, estab
lished for the purpose o f preventing an arbitrary and willful
individual or minority coercing the majority in a parliamentary
body. 1 call the attention of the Senate to a work printed in
1090, I^x Parliamentaria, giving the practice in the British
Parliament. On page 292 o f that work this language occurs:
If upon a debate it be much controverted and much be said against the
question, any member may move that the question may be first made,
Whether that question shall be put or whether it shall be now put,
which usually is admitted at the instance o f nny member, especially if
It be seconded and insisted upon ; and if that question being put. it pass
in the affirmative then the main question is to be put Immediately, and
no man may speak anything further to it, either to add or clter.
Mr. President, coming down to the days o f the Continental
Congress, I read from page 534 o f volume 11, 17TS, o f the Jour
nals of the Continental Congress, giving the rules of that body
and showing the purpose of the Continental Congress at that
time to prevent any individual or minority unnecessarily con
suming the time o f that body.
0. No Member shall speak more than twice <n any one debate on tho
same day, without leave of the House.
*
•
•
•
•
•
•
10. When a question is before the House no motion shall he received
unless for an amendment, for the previous question, to postpone the con
sideration o f the main question or to commit it.
Sections 13 and 14 read :
13. The previous question— dhat Is, that the main question shall be
not now put— being moved, the question from the Chair shall be
that these who are for the previous question say aye and those
against it, no ; and if there be a majority of ayes, then the main ques
tion shall not be then put, but otherwise it shall.
14 Kach Member present shall declare openly and without debate
■his assent or dissent to a question by aye amt no, when required by
motion of any one Member, whose nrfme shall be entered ns having
made such motion previous to the President's putting the q uestion;
the name and vote in such cases shall be entered upon the Journal,
and the majority of votes of each State shall be the vote of that State.
That was the rule o f the Continental Congress. The rule
of the House o f Representatives is equally well kuown to
dearly and openly recognize the previous question, count a
qnorrnn, and by a rule fix a time for voting on any question.
A1T22—U4S48
5
When it came to drafting the Constitution o f the United
States Mr. Pinckney proposed in his original draft a provision
that the yeas and nays o f the Members of each House on any
question shall, at the desire of any certain number of Members;
be entered on the Journal.
, The committee on detail, page 16(5 of volume 2 of the records'
of the Federal convention, by Farrand. reported as follows: *
The House of Representatives and the Senate, when it shall be
acting in a legislative cnpacMy (each House) shall keep a Journal of
its proceedings, and shall from time to time publish them, * *
*
and the yeas and nays of the Members of each House on any ques
tion shall, at the desire of any Member, be entered on the Journal.
That was retained throughout as a part of the Constitution
and was discussed on Friday the 10th day of August, page 255,
as follows:
Mr Govr. Morris urged that if the yeas and nays were proper at all
any individual ought to be authorize* to call for th em : and moved an
amendment to that effect, saying that the small States would other
wise be under a disadvantage, and Gnd it difficult to get a concur
rence of one-flftb.
That was voted down unanimously, and the following Slates:
New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Penn
sylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South
Carolina, and Georgia voted to agree to the rule that one-fifth
of the Members might call for the record of the yeas and
nays as a constitutional right.
I call the attention of the Senate to the proper interpretation
of that language. We have ordinarily held to the practice that
the yeas and nays should be called after the vote had been or
dered. but the right to have the yeas and nays immediateiy
called under the Constitution of the United States is a consti
tutional right. As a Senator from Oklahoma, I have a right,
being present, if I am supported by one-fifth of the Members of
this body, to Imve my vote and the vote o f every other Member
of this body recorded on any pending question without having
my right denied by an organized filibuster. You can not record
a vote on the Journal of the Senate unless you take the v o le;
and, therefore, the constitutional right to have my vole recorded
upon the Journal at the request of one-fifth of the Members
presentcarries a presentright and not a future expectation or
vague hope at some unrecorded future time that it may be re
corded. when a minority or an individual may permit it. I
have, therefore, a constitutional right, when supported by onefifth of the Members of this body, to demand the immedialo
taking of the yeas and nays on any question pending and the
record of that vote in the Journal of the Senate»
Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, will the Senator allow me
to ask him a question?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator.
Mr. WILLIAMS. Is it not a truth applicable to everything
that wherever a right is granted at all it is a right in prscsentl
and not in futuro. unless the grant is modified by an express
statement that it is in futuro?
Mr. OWEN. Absolutely. Now, Mr. President, I want to call
the attention o f the Senate to what has been done in regard to
this question of cloture or limitation of debate by the Senate
Itself.
- /’
81722— 14548
0
The Senate rules, as established at the beginning of this Gov
ernment. adopted in 1789. are found upon page
of the Annals
o f the First Congress, from 1780 to 1791. volume 1. That vol
ume contains the rules o f the Senate as of that date, from No. t
to 19. and those rules expressly provide against the abuse of the
time of the Senate in a number o f particulars. First, in para
graph 2, it is provided that—
20
2. No Member shall speak to another or otherwise interrupt the busi
ness of the Senate, or read any printed paper, while the Journals or
public papers are reading, or When any Member is speaking in any
del ate.
a. Every Member wiirn lie speaks shall address the Chair, standing
in his place, and tchcn he has finished shall sit doicn.
It obviously contemplated his finishing within some reason
able time and taking his seat.
4. No Member shall speak more than twice in any one debate on
the same day without leave c f the Senate.
Showing the Intention of the Senate that one man should
bo alloiccd to monopolize the time of the Senate.
Paragraph S reads:
not
8. W hile a question is before the Senate no motion shall be received
unless for an amendment, for the previous Question, or for postponing
the main question, or to commit it, or to adjourn.
And paragraph 9 provides:
0 The previous Question briny moved and seconded, the question
from (lie Chair shall be, “ Shall the main question be now p u t ? ” And
if the nays prevail the main question shall not then be put.
On n divided vote the main question was to be put is a
necessary consequence that flows from that language. It re
quired n majority vote in the negative to prevent the closure
o f debate under the original rules of the Senate.
Paragraph 11 reads:
11. When Vic peas and naps shall b e c a l l e d for bp one-fifth of the
Members present, each Member called upon shall, unless for special
reasons he be excused by tlie Senate, declare openly and icitliout debate
his assent or dissent to the question.
Mr. President, that was the rule of the Senate up until ISO!
At that time the rules were modified so as to o m i t the refer
ence to the previous question, not by putting in any rule deny
ing the right o f the previous question, but merely omitting the
previous question, on the broad theory that courtesy of free
speech in the Senate would preclude any Member from the
abuse o f the courtesy o f free speech extended to him by liis
colleagues, and would preclude a Senator from consuming the
time o f the Senate unduly, unfairly, or impudently, in disregard
Of the courtesy extended to him by his colleagues. The failure
to move the previous question now is merely a matter o f
courtesy in this body, and carries with it, so long as it lasts,
tbo reciprocal courtesy on behalf o f those to whom this cour
tesy is extended that they shall not impose upon their col
leagues who have extended the courtesy to them o f freedom of
debate or deny their courteous and long-suffering colleagues
the right to a vote. Freedom o f debate may not under such
an interpretation be carried to tlie point o f a garrulous abuse
o f the floor of the Senate by the reading of old records and
endless speecbmaking made against time, which has emptied
the Senate Chamber and destroyed genuine debate in this body.
81722— 14543
At the time the previous question was dropped from the written
rules o f the Semite as a right under such written rules there
had been no need for the “ previous question.” The previous
question had only been moved four times and only used three
times from 17SD to 1S0G—that is. during 17 years.
There is no real debate in the Senate. Occasionally a Senator
makes a speech that is worth listening to—occasionally, and
only occasionally. The fact is that even speeches of the great
est value which are delivered on this floor have little or no
audience now because o f this gross abuse o f the patience of
the Senate, which has been brought to a point where men are
no longer willing to be abused by loud-mouthed vociferation of
robust-lunged partisans confessedly speaking against time iu
a filibuster, and are unwilling to keep their seats on this floor
to listen to an endless tirade intended not to instruct the Sen
ate. intended not to advise the Senate, intended not for legiti
mate debate, not for an honest exercise o f freedom o f speech,
but for the sinister, ulterior, half-concealed purpose of killing
time in the Senate and thereby preventing the Senate from acting, thus establishing a minority veto under the pretense, the
bald pretense, the impudent and false pretense, of freedom of
debate.
This courtesy in the Senate was not greatly abused prior to
the war, nor until the tierce recent conflict began between the
plutocracy and monopoly and the common peop’e. Its abuse
during the last century led, however, to various proposals by
various distinguished Members of this body of cloture in various
forms.
The first one that I care to call attention to is that of Mr.
Clay, in 1S41. in connection with which Mr. Henry Clay said
among other tilings—this was on the 12th of July, 1S41—that—•
Jin was ready at any moment to bring forward and support a measure
which should give to (lie majority (lie conlro! of 1lie business of the
Sonale of tbc United States.
Let them denounce it as much as they
pleased, its advocates, unmoved by any of their denunciations and
threats, standing firm in support of the interests which he believed the
country demands, for one lie was ready for the adoption of a rule
which would place the business of the Senate under the control of a
majority of the Senate.
In the first session in the Thirty-first Congress, July 27, ISTiO,
Mr. Douglas, then a Senator o f the United States, submitted the
following motion for consideration:
Resolved, That the following be, and the rame is, adopted as a stand
ing rule of the Senate:
That the previous question shall be admitted when demanded by a
m ajorily of the Members of the Senate present, and its effect shall be
to put an end to ail debate and bring the Senate to a direct vote, first,
upon a motion to commit, if such motion shall have been made—
And so forth.
Mr. Hole, on April 4, 1SG2. brought in a resolution of like
purport; Mr. Wade, on June 21, 1SG4, proposed a like resolution;
Mr. Pomeroy, on February 13, 1SG9; Mr. Hamlin, on March 10,
1S70; and various other Senators. I ask, without reading these
various proposals, to place them in the Ricohdfor the informa
tion o f the Senate o f the United States.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (M r. R ansdell in the ch a ir).
Without objection, it will he so ordered.
81722— 14518
8
The matter referred to is as follows:
LIMITATION OF
D FBATB.
[1 st sess. 31st Cong.. J. of S.. 482, July 27. 1830.1
Mr. Douglas submitted the following motion for consideration :
Resolved, That the following be, and the same is, adopted as a stand
ing rule of the Senate.
That the previous question shall be admitted when demanded by a
majority of the Members of the Senate present, and its effect shall be
to put an end to all debate, and bring the Senate to a direct vote,
first, upon a motion to commit, if such motion shall have been m ade;
and if this motion does not prevail, then, second, upon amendments
reported by a committee, if a n y ; then, third, upon pending amend
m en ts; and. finally, where such questions shall, or when none shall
have been offered, or when none mav he pending, then it shall be upon
the main question or questions leading directly to a final decision of
the subject matter before the Senate. On a motion for the previous
question, and prior to the seconding of the same, a call of the Senate
shall be in order; but after a majority shall have seconded such
motion no call shall be in order prior to a decision of the main ques
tion.
On a previous question there shall be no debate.
All inci
dental questions arising after a motion shall have been made for the
previous quest! n and. pending such motion, shall be decided, whether
on appeal or otherwise, without debate.
(Aug. 28. The resolution was laid on the table (ib.. 5 8 8 ).)
[2d sess. S7th Cong., J. of S., 370, Apr. 4, 1862.]
Mr. Hale submitted the following icsolution for consideration:
Resolved, That the following be added to the rules of the S enate:
The Senate may. at any time during the present rebellion, by a voto
of a majority of the Members present, fix a time when debate on any
matter pending before the Senate shall cease and terminate : and tho
Senate shall, when the time fixed for terminating debate arrives, pro
ceed to vote, without debate, on the measure and all amendments pend
ing and that may be offered.
[1st sess. 3Sth Cong., J. of S.. 601, June 21, 1864.1
Mr. Wade submitted the following resolution for consideration:
" Resolved, That during the remainder of the present session of Con
gress no Senator shall speak more than once on any one question before
the Senate; nor shall such speech exceed 10 minutes, without leave of
the Senate expressly given ; and when such leave is asked it shall be
decided by the Senate without debate; and it shall be the duty of the
President to see that this rule is strictly enforced.”
[3d sess. 40th Cong.. .1 of S., 256, Feb. 13, I8 6 0 .]
Mr. Pomeroy submitted the following resolution, which was ordered
to be printed :
“ Resolved, That the following be added to the standing rules of the
Sen ate:
“ ‘ R olf. — . While the motion for the previous question shall not bo
entertained in the Senate, yet the Senators, by a vote of three-tifths of
the Members, may determine the time when debate shall close upon
any pending proposition, and then the main question shall be taken
by a vote of the Senate in manner provided for under existing rules.’ *'
[2d s^ss. 41st Ceng., J. of S., 347, Mar. 10. 1870.1
Mr. Hamlin submitted the following resolution for consideration:
“ Resolved, That whenever any question shall have been under con
sideration for two days it shall be competent, without debate, for the
Senate, by a two-thirds majority, to fix a time, not less than one day
thereafter, when the main question shall be taken ; but each Senator
who shall offer an amendment shall be allowed five minutes to speak
upon the same, and one Senator a like time In reply.”
[Ib , 412, Mar 25. 1870.]
Mr. Wilson submitted the following motion for consideration:
Ordered, That the Select Committee on Rules be instructed to con
sider the expediency of adopting a rule for the remainder of the session
providing that whenever any bill has been considered for two days the
question on ordering it to a third reading may be ordered by a twothirds vote of the Senators present and voting.
[ib ., *6 3 . Apr. 7, 1870 ]
The Senate next proceeded to consider (the above) ; and
On motion of Mr. Edmunds.
Ordered, That the said resolution be passed over.
81722— 14548
[Ib ., 492, Apr. 14, 1879.]
The Senate next resumed the consideration of the resolution sub
mitted by Mr. W ilson on the 25th of March last, instructing the Select
Ccmmitlee on the Revision of the Rules to consider the expediency of
adopting a rule for the remainder of the session fixing a time when the
Question on ordering a bill to a third reading shall be p u t; and
The resolution was agreed to.
[2d sess. 41st Cong., J. of S., 778, June 9, 1870.]
Mr. Pomeroy submitted the following resolution for consideration,
which was ordered to be printed :
Resolved, That the thirtieth rule of the Senate be amended by add
ing thereto the follo w in g:
‘ ‘And nny pending amendment to an appropriation bill may be laid
on the tab e without affecting the bill.
“ It shall he in order at any time when an appropriation bill is
under consideration, by a two-thirds vote, to order the termination of
debate at a time fixed in respect to any item or amendment thereof
then under consideration, which order shall be acted upon without
debate.
[2d sesj 42d Cong., J. of S., Apr. 1. 1872.]
Mr. I’omcroy submitted the following resolution for consideration:
ltcsolvcil, That upon any amendment to general appropriation bills
remarks upon the same by any one Senator shall be limited to live
minutes.
[2d sess. 42d Cong.. J. of S.. G14, Apr. 2G.]
Mr. Scott submitted the folowing resolution, which was ordered to
be printed:
Resolved, That during the present session it shall be in order, pending
an appropriation hill, to move to confine debate on the pending bill
and amendments thereto to five minutes by any Senator on the pending
motion, and the motion to limit debate shall be decided without debate.
[Ib.. G30, Apr. 29, 1872.]
On motion by M r. Scott,
The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution submitted by him
on the 2Gth instant, to confine debate on appropriation bills and amend
ments thereto for the remainder qf the session; and the resolution hav
ing been modified by Mr. Scott to read as follow s:
“ Resolved, That during tee present session it shall be in order,
pending an appropriation bill, to move to coniine debate on amend
ments thereto to five minutes by any Senator on the pending motion,
and the motion to limit debate shall be decided without debate.”
A fter debate,
On motion by Mr. Vickers, to amend the resolution by inserting after
the word “ thereto,” the words “ germane to the subject matter of tho
bill.”
|Several proposed amendments to this part of the resolution are
omitted. |
On motion by Mr. Edmunds, to amend the resolution by adding
thereto the following :
.
.
.
.
.
“ And no amendment to any such bill making legislative provisions
other than such ns directly relate to the appropriations contained in
the bill shall be received.”
It was determined in the affirmative— yeas 25, nays 19.
[The names are omitted.]
So the amendment was agreed to.
_ .
The resolution having been further amended on motion of Mr. Scott,
on tlie question to agree thereto as amended in the following w ords:
"R esolved, That during tie present session it shall he in order to move
ft recess; and pending an appropriation hill to move to confine debato
on amendment thereto to live minutes bv any Senator on the pending
motion, and such motions shall be decided without debate; and no
amendment to any such bill making legislative provisions other than
such as directly relate to the appropriations contained in the bill snail
be received.”
00
( 1C 3S-
________ ___ ________________
It was determined In the affirmative, \>jays_ILI__________I __________
[The names are omitted.]
8o the resoh’ tion was agreed to.
81722— 14548
o< i
13
■
n
10
[3d scss. 42d Cong., J. of S., G15, March 18, 1873.]
Mr. W right submitted the following resolution for consideration,
which was ordered to he printed :
“ Resolved, That the Committee on the Revision of the Rules be in
structed to inquire into the propriety of so amending the rules as to
provide —
“ First. That debate shall be confined and be relevant to the subject
matter before the Senate.
"S e c o n d That the previous question may be demanded either by a
majority vote or in some modified form.
“ Third. For taking up bills in their regular order on the calendar;
for their disposition in such order; prohibiting special orders; and re
quiring that bills not finally disposed o f when thus called shall go
to the foot of the calendar unlcs; otherwise directed.”
Tib., GIG, Mar. 19, 1873.]
On motion by Mr. W right, that the Senate proceed to the consider
ation of the resolution submitted by him on the 1 7 t;i instant instruct
ing the Select Committee on the Revision of the Rules to inquire into
the propriety of so amending the rules of the Senate as to confine debate
to the subject matter before the Senate, to provide for a previous ques
tion, and tiie order of the consideration of hills on the calendar, and
the disposition th ereo f;
A fter debate,
f V/**] c
?
9'*l
3q
It was determined in the negative,|N g vg--------- -----------------------[The names are omitted.]
So tfcc motion to proceed to the consideration of the said resolution
was not agreed to.
[ C o n g r e s s io n a l R ecord , 3d scss. 42d Cong. (s p e c , s c s s .) 1 1 3 -1 1 7 .]
[Ib ., G17, Mar. 20. 1873.]
Mr. W right submitted the following resolution for consideration;
which was ordered to be printed :
“ R e s o l v e d , That the following be added to the rules of the Senate:
“ Rule — . No debate shall be in order unless it relate to, or be perti
nent to, the question before the Senate.
“ Rule — . Debate may be closed at any time upon any bill or measure
by the order of two-thirds of the Senators present, after notice c f 24
hours to that effect.
“ Rule — . All bills shall be placed upon the calendar in their order,
and sta ll be d'sposed of in such order tin'c^s postponed bv the order of
the Sena’c. All special orders are prohibited, except by unanimous con
sent ; and bills postponed shall, unless otherwise ordered, go to the foot
of the calendar.
Tib., G18, Mar. 21, 1873.]
On motion by Mr. W right, that the Senate proceed to the considera
tion cf the resolution yesterday submitted by him, providing additional
rules for the Senate.
A fter debate.
Ordered, That the further consideration of the subject be postponed
to the first Mondav of December next.
[ C o n g r e s s io n a l R ec or d , 3d scss. 42d Cong. (spec, s e ss.l, 1 3 5 -1 3 7 .J
[1st scss. 43d Cong., J. of S.. 532, May G. 1 874.]
Mr. Edmunds submitted ti c following resolution, which was referred
to the Select Committee on the Revision of the R u le s:
“ Revolved, That the eleventh rule of the Senate he amended by add
ing thereto the following w o rd s; “ Nor shall such debate be allowed
upon any motion to dispose of a pending matter and proceed to con
sider another.
When a question is under consideration the debate
thereon s ta ll be germane to such question or to the subject to which It
relates.”
[Ib., 578, May 15, 1 8 7 4 .].
Mr. Ferry o f Michigan, from the Select Committee on t ic Revision
o f the Rules, to whom was referred the resolution submitted by Mr.
Edmunds the G:h instant to amend the eleventh rule of the Senate,
reported it with an amendment.
[2d scss. 43d Cong., J. of S., 128, Jan. IS , 1S75.]
Mr. Morrill of Maine, submitted the following resolution for consid
eration, which was ordered to be printed:
“ R esolved, That during the present session it shall be in order at
any time to move a recess, and, pending an appropriation bill, lo move
to confine debate on amendments thereto to fi\c minutes uy any Senator
on the pending motion, and such motions shall be decided without
debate.”
81722— 14548
11
rIt*-, 134, Jan. 19, 1 875.]
The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution yesterday submitted
by Mr. Morrill of Maine, to limit debate on amendments to appropri
ation b ills ; and
A fter debate,
The resolution was agreed to, as follow s:
“ Resolved, That during the present session it shall be in order at any
time to move a recess, and, pending an appropriation bill, to move
to confine debate cn amendments thereto to live minutes by any Senator
on the pending motion, and such motion shall be decided without
debate.”
(C ongress i on At, R ecord , 2d sess., 43d Cong., 580-570.)
[1 st sess. 44th Cong., J. of S., 243. Feb. 23, 1370.]
Mr. Morrill of Maine submitted the following resolution for consid
eration, which was ordered to be p iin ted :
“ R esolved, That during the present session it shall be in order at
any time to move a recess, and, pending an appropriation bill, to move
to confine debate on amendments thereto to five minutes by any Senator
on the pending motion, and such motion shall be decided without
debate.”
rib., 253, Feb. 29, 1S7G.]
On motion by Mr. Morrill, of Maine,
The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution yesterday submitted
by. him to eonine debate on amendments to appropriation b ills ; and,
Laving been amended cn motion by Mr. Morrill, of Maine,
On mol ion by Mr. bayard, to further amend the resolution by add
ing thereto the follow ing:
Rut no amendment to an appropriation bill shall be in order which
Is not germane to such a bill,”
A fter debate.
-----------------------------------------------It was determined in the negative,
[The names are omitted.]
So the amendment was not agreed to.
No further amendment being proposed, the resolution as amended was
agreed to, as fo llo w s:
“ Resolved, T1 at during the present session it snail be in order at any
time to move a recess, and. pending an appropriation b 11, to move to
confine dibate on amendments thereto to five minutes by any Senator
on the pending motion, and such motions shall be decided without
debate.”
[2d sess. 45th Cong., J c f S., 314, Mar. 20, 1S78.]
Mr. Windoin submitted the following resolution for consideration:
“ Resolved, That during the present session it shall be in order at
any time pending an appropriation bill to move to confine debate on
amendmenls (hereto to five mimr.es by any Senator on the pending
motion, and such motion shall he decided without debate.”
I2d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S „ 319, Mar. 2 1 , 1878.]
On motion by Mr. Windoin,
The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution yesterday submitted
by him, providing for a limitation of debate on amendments to appro
priation bills, and
The resolution was agreed to.
[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S.. 32, Dec. 5, 1878.]
Mr. Anthony submitted the following resolution for consideration :
“ Resolved, That to-day, at 1 o'clock, the Senate will proceed to the
consideration of the calendar, and bills that are not objected to shall
be taken up In their order, and each Senator shall be entitled to speak
once, and for five minutes only, unless, upon motion, the Senate should
at any time otherwise order; and the objection may be interposed at
any stage of the proceedings; and this order shall take precedence of
special orders or unfinished business unless otherwise ordered.”
(T h e resolution went over, objection being made.)
[3d sess. 43th Cong., J. of S., 114. Jan. 14, 1879.]
Mr. Anthony submitted the following resolution, which was consid
ered, by unanimous consent, and agreed t o :
“ Resolved, That on Friday next, at 1 o'clock, the Senate will pro
ceed to tiie consideration of the calendar, and liilis that are not objected
to shall be taken up in their order, and each Senator shall be entitled to
speak once, and for five minutes only, unless, upon mot on. the Senate
should at any time otherwise order, and the objection may he interposed
at any stage of the proceedings."
(C o n g r e s s io n a l R e c or d , 3d sess. 43tb Cong.. 427.)
81722— 14548
[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S„ 138, Jan. 20, 1879.]
Mr. Anthony submitted the following resolution, which was consid
ered, by unanimous consent, and agreed t o :
“ Resolved, That at the conclusion o f the morning business for each
day after this day the Senate will proceed to the consideration of tho
calendar, and continue such consideration until half past 1 o'clock, and
bills that are not objected to shall be taken up in their order, and each
Senator shall be entitled to speak once, and for five minutes only, unless,
upon motion, the Senate should at any time otherwise order, and tho
objection may be interposed at any stage o f the proceedings.”
[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. o f S., 189, Jan. 30, 1879.]
Mr. Anthony submitted the following resolution for consideration :
Resolved, That the order of the Senate of January 20. 1879, relative
to the consideration o f bills on the calendar shall not be suspended
unless by unanimous consent or upon one day’s notice.”
[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S., 325, Feb. 20, 1879.]
Mr. Windom submitted the following resolution for consideration:
“ R e s u l t e d , That during the present session it shall be in order at any
time pending an appropriation bill to move to confine debate on amend
ments thereto to five minutes by any Senator on the pending motion,
and such motion shall be decided without debate.”
[3d sess. 45th Cong., J. of S., 373, Feb. 25, 1879.]
On motion by Mr. Allison,
The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution submitted by Mr.
Windom on the 20th instant to confine debate on amendments to gen
eral appropriation b ills ; and
The resolution was agreed to.
[2d sess. 46th Cong., J. of S., 594, M ay 22, 1880.1
The hour of half past 12 o'clock having arrived, the President pro
tempore asked the Senate to place its construction upon the order of
February 5, 1880, and known as the “ Anthony rule,” and submitted
the following proposition : “ Does the consideration of the calendar con
tinue until half past 1 o’ clock, notwithstanding the change of the hour
of meeting of the Senate? ”
[3d sess. 46th Cong., J. of S., 244, Feb. 12. 1881.]
On motion by Mr. Morgan,
The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution submitted by him tho
10th instant, limiting debate on a motion to proceed to the considera
tion of a bill or resolution ; and having been modified on the motion o f
Mr. Morgan, the resolution as modified was agreed to, as follo w s:
“ Resolved, That ter the lemainder of the present session, on a motion
to take up a bill or resolution for consideration, at the present or at n
future time, debate shall be limited to 15 minutes, and no Senator shall
speak to such motion more than once, .or for a longer time than 5
m inutes."
[3d sess. 46th Cong., J. of S., 234, Feb. 10, 1881.]
Mr. Morgan submitted the following resolution for consideration:
“ Resolved, That on a motion to take up a bill or resolution for con
sideration at the present or at a future time debate shall be limited to
15 minutes, and no Senator shall speak to such motion oftener than
once, or for a longer time than 5 minutes.”
[1st sess. 47th Cong., J. o f S„ 446, Mar. 20, 1882.]
On motion o f Mr. Anthony, to amend the order of the Senate known
as the “ Anthony rule,” so as to extend the time for the consideration of
the calendar of Dills and resolutions until 2 o’ clock p. m„ it was deter
mined in the affirmative.
[1st sess. 47th Cong., J. of S., 632, Apr. 20, 1882.]
M r. Edmunds submitted the following resolution for consideration,
which was ordered to be printed :
“ Resolved, T hat the special rule of the Senate for the consideration
of matters on the calendar under limited debate be, a n j the same is
hereby, abolished.”
Mr. Hoar submitted the following resolution for consideration, which
was ordered to be printed :
“ R esolved, T hat the resolve known as the “ Anthony r u le ” shall not
hereafter be so construed as to authorize the consideration of any meas
ure under a limitation of debate of (}ve minutes, or to speaking but once
by each Senator after objection."
81722— 14548
!
,
.
[2a
RRSS. 47tb Cons.. J. of S.. 282, Feb. 3, 1883.]
M r. Hale submitted the following resolution for consideration, which
was ordered to be printed :
“ Resolved, That upon each amendment hereafter offered to the bill
entitled ‘An act to reduce internal revenue taxation,’ each Senator may
speak once for five minutes, and no more.”
[2d sess. 47th Cong., J. of S„ 396, Feb. 23, 1883.]
Mr. Hale submitted the following resolution for consideration:
“ Resolved, That during the present session it shall be in order at any
time pending an appropriation bill to move to confine debate on amend
ments thereto to five minutes b.v any Senator on the pending motion, and
said motion shall be decided without debate.”
'
[1st sess. 48th Cong., J. of S., 354, Feb. 26. 1884.]
Mr. Harris submitted the following resolution, which was referred to
the Committee on Rules and ordered to be printed :
“ Resolved, That the seventh rule of the Senate be amended by adding
thereto the following words :
“ 4 The Presiding Officer may at any time lay, and it shall be in order
at any time for a Senator to move to lay, before the Senate any bill or
other matter sent to the Senate by the President or the House of Rep
resentatives, and any question pending at that time shall be suspended
for this purpose.
Any motion so made shall be determined without
debate.’ ”
Mr. Harris submitted (ho following resolution, which was referred to
the Committee on Rules and ordered to be printed :
“ R esolved, ’that the eighth rule of the Senate be amended by adding
thereto the following words :
• ‘All motions made before 2 o’clock to proceed to the consideration
‘
Of any matter shall be determined without debate.’ ”
[1 st sess. 48th Cong., J. of S., 442, Mar. 19, 1884.]
On motion by Mr. Harris,
The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution to amend the eighth
r u le : and
The resolution was agreed to, as follows :
“ Resolved, That the eighth rule of (he Senate be amended by adding
thereto the following w ord s: ‘All motions made before 2 o’clock to
proceed to the consideration of any matter shall be determined without
debate.’ ”
On motion by Mr. Harris,
The Senate proceeded to consider the resolutions reported from the
Committee on Rules on the 7th instant to amend the tenth rule, and
havinu been amended on the motion of Mr. Harris, from the Committee
On Rules, by inserting, after the word ‘‘ order,” the words “ or to proceed
to the consideration of other business.”
The resolution as amended was agreed to, as fo llo w s:
“ Resolved. That the tenth rule of the Senate be amended by adding
thereto the following w ord s: ‘And all motions to change such order
or to proceed to the consideration of other business shall be decided
without debate.’ ”
[1 st sess. 48th Cong., J. of S., 431, Mar. 17, 1884.]
Mr. Harris, from the Committee on Rules, to which was referred the
resolution submitted by him February 26, 1884, to amend the seventh
rule of the Senate, reported it without amendment.
The Senate proceeded, by unanimous consent, to consider the said
resolution : and
R esolved, That the Senate agree thereto.
. . .
Mr. Harris, from the Committee on Rules, to which was referred the
resolution submitted by him February 26. 1884. to amend the eighth
rule of the Senate, reported it without amendment.
Mr. Harris, from the Committee cn Rules, reported the following
resolution for consideration :
" R esolved. That the tenth rule of the Senate be amended by adding
thereto the following w ord s: ‘And all motions to change such order shall
he decided without d eb a te.1 ”
[2d sess. 48th Cong., J. of S., 359, Feb. 24, 1885.]
Mr. Aliiscn submitted the following order for consideration, which
was ordered to be printed :
.
Ordered, That during the remainder of the present session of the
Senate it shall he in order to move at any time that debate on any
amendment oi all amendments to any ap p reciation bill then before the
Senate be limited to five minutes for each Senator, and that no Senator
shall speak more than once on the same amendment in form or sub
81722— 14548
14
stance.
debate
The
question
on
such
motion
shall be determined
without
f2d sess. 48th Cong., J of S., 380. Fob. 2G. 1885.1
The President pro tempore laid before the Senate the order submitted
by Mr. Allison on the 24th instant to limit debate to five minutes on
amendments to appropriation bills for the remainder o f the present
session.
On motion by Mr. Plumb.
Ordered, That the further consideration thereof be postponed to to
morrow.
[1 st sess. 49th Cong., J. of S., 503, Apr. 1, 1 886.}
Mr. Ingalls submitted the following resolution, which was referred to
the Committee on Rules :
“ R esolved, That Rule X I I I be amended by striking out the words
' without debate,’ in the last sentence o f clause 1.”
[1 st sess. 49th Cong., .1. of S., 904. June 14, 1886.]
Mr. Edmunds submitted the following resolution, which was referred
to the Committee on R ules:
“ Resolved, That the last paragraph of the first clause of Rule X III
be amended so as to read as follows :
“ 'A ny motion to reconsider may be laid on the table without affecting
the question in reference to which the same is made, and if laid on the
table it shall be a final disposition of the motion.’ ”
11st sess. 49th Cong., .1. of S., 94 5 , June 21, 1886.]
Mr. Frye, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following reso
lution, which was considered, by unanimous consent, and agreed t o :
“ l evolved. That the last paragraph of clause 1. Rule X I I I , is hereby
amended by striking out the words ‘ without debate.’
Mr. Frye, from the Committee on Rules, to whom were referred the
fcl'ow ing resolutions, reported adversely thereon :
The resolution submitted by Mr. Ingalls April 1, 1886, to amend
clause 1 of Rule X III of the S enate; and
The resolution submitted bv Mr. Edmunds on the 14th instant to
amend clause 1 of Rule X III of the Senate.
Ordered That they be postponed indefinitely.
[2d sess. 49th Cong.. J. of S., 387, Feb. 21, 1887.]
M r. Cameron submitted the following resolution for consideration,
which was orderrd to be printed :
“ Resolved, That during the remainder of this session no Senator shall
speak on any question more than once, and shall confine his remarks
to five minutes’ duration.”
[2d sess. 49th Cong., J. of S., 400, Feb. 22, 1887.]
The President pro tempore laid before the Senate the resolution
yesterday submitted by Mr. Cameron, limiting debate during the re
mainder of the sessio n ;
When.
M r. Edmunds raised a question of order, viz, that the resolution would
change the standing rules of the Senate, of which proper notice had
not been givrn. as required by the fortieth rule; and
The President pro tempore sustained the point of order.
[1st sess. 50th Cong., J. of S., 315, Feb. 14, 1S88.]
Mr. Blackburn submitted the following resolution, which was referred
to the Committee on R u le s:
“ Resolved, That it shall not be in order, except by unanimous consent,
for the Committee on Appropriations to report to the Senate for con
sideration or action any general appropriation bill without having had
such bill under consideration for a peried of 10 days or m ore."
[1st sess. 50th Cong., J. of S., 829, May 16, 1 888.]
Mr. Edmunds submitted the following resolution, which was referred
to the Commit ec on R ules:
“ Resolved. That paragraph 3 of Rule X V I be amended by adding
thereto the follow ing:
“ Whenever any general appropriation bill originating In the House
of Representatives shall be undei consideration, it shall be the duty of
the presiding officer to cause to be stricken out o f such bill ail pro
visions therein o f a general legislative character other than such as
relate to the disposition of the moneys appropriated therein; but such
order of the presiding officef shall be subject to an appeal to the Senate
as in other cases of questions of order.”
81722— 14548
15
f i s t SPSS. 51st Cong., J. of S., 250, Apr. 23, 1890.1
Mr. Chandler submitted the following resolution, which was referred
to the Committee on Rules and ordered to be printed :
“ R ew ired, That the following be adopted as a standing rule of the
Sen ate:
“ • Whenever a bill or resolution reported from a committee is under
Consideration the Senate ma.v, on motion, to be acted on without debate
Or dilatory motions, order that on a day, not less than six days after
the pass-age of the order, debate shall cease and the Senate proceed to
dispose of the bill or resolution; and when said day shall arrive, at 3
o’c’ock the vote shall be forthwith taken without debate or dilatory
motions upon any amendments to the bill or resolution and upon tho
passaec thereof.
“ * Whenever a quorum of Senators shall not vote on any roll call the
presiding officer at the request of any Senator shall cause to be entered
upon the Journal the names of all the Senators present and not voting,
and such Senators shall be deemed and taken as in attendance and
presrnt as nart of the nuorum to do business: and declaration of the
result of the voting shall be made accordingly.’ ”
[1st scss. 51st Cong., J. of S., 431, July 1G, 1S90.]
Mr. Allison submitted the following resolution for consideration,
which was ordered to be printed :
“ Rcsolveil. That during (lie remainder c f the present session of Con
gress it shall be in order to move at any time that debate on any
amendment or all amendments to any appropriation bill then before the
Senate be limited to five minutes for each Senator, and that no Senator
shall speak more than once on the same amendment in form or sub
stance. The question on such motion shall be determined without de
bate.”
[1st sess. 51st Cong.. J. of S.. 449, Aug. 1, 18C0.]
Mr. Rlair submitted the following resolution, which was ordered to
be pr n te d :
“ Resolved, That the Committee on Rules be instructed to report a
rule within four days providin'! for the incorporation of the previous
question or some method for limiting and closing debate ia the parlia
mentary procedure of the Senate.
[1st sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 450. Aug. 9, 1890.]
The Frcs'dcnt pro tempore laid before the Senate the resolution
yesterday submitted by Mr. Clair, as fe llo w s :
" R esulted, That the Committee on Rules be instructed to report a
rule within four days providing for the incorporation of the previous
question or some method for limiting and closing debate in the parlia
mentary procedure of the Senate.”
O dered. That it be referred to the Committee on Rules.
(Cong. Rec., 1st sess. 51st Cong., 8 0 4 8 -8 0 5 0 .)
[1st sess. 51st Cong., J. of S„ 460, Aug. 9. 1890.]
Mr. Iloar submitted the following resolution, which was referred to
the Committee on Rules and ordered to be printed:
“ RvscUcd, That the Rules of the Senate be amended by adding ns
fo llo w s:
“ When any bill or resolution shall have been under consideration for a
reasonable time it shall be in order for any Senator to demand that debate
thereon be closed.
If such demand be seconded by a majority of the
Senators present, the question shall forthwith be taken thereon wiihout
further debate, and the pending measure shall take precedence of all
other business whatever. If the Senate shall decide to close debate, the
question shall be put unon the ponding amendments, upon amendments
of which notice shall then be given, and upon the measure in its suc
cessive stages, according to the rules of the Senate, but without further
debate, except that every Senator who may desire shall be permitted
to speak upon the measure not more than once and not exceeding *>0
minutes.
,
‘ ‘After such demand shall have been made by any Senator, no other
motion shall tie in order until the same shall have been voted upon by
the Senate, unless the same shall fail to be seconded.
“ A fter the Senate shall have decided to close debate, no mot on shall
be in order but a motion to adjourn or to take a recess, when such
motion shall he seconded liy a majority of the Senate.
When either
of said m ot’ons shall have been lost, or shall have failed of a second, it
shall not be in order to renew the same untd one Senator sha
have
spoken upon the pending measure or one vote on the same shall have
intervened.”
81722— 14548
[1st sess. 51st Pong., .1. of S., 463, Aug. 12, 1880 1
Mr. Edmunds submitted the following order for consideration; which
was ordered to be printed :
Ordered, That during the consideration of Ilruse bill Ot!C>. cn'itied
"A n act to reduce the revenue and equalize duties on imports. <%id for
other purposes," no Senator shall speak more than once, and not longer
than five minutes, on or in resnect of any one item in said bid ■ r .my
amendment proposed thereto without leave of the Senate, such leave to
be granted or denied without debate and without any other moiion or
proceeding other than such as relates to procuring a quorum whin It
shall appear on a division, or on the yeas and navs bei nr mk a. m at
a voting quorum is net present : and until said bill shall have been
gone through with to the point of a third reading no general motion in
respect of said hill other than to take it up shall be in order.
All appeals pending the matter aforesaid shall be determined at once,
and without debate.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Rule X L , that the foregoing order
will lie offered for adoption in the Senate.
It is proposed to suspend for the foregoing stated purpose ti n fol
low ng rules, namelv : V, V III, IX , X , X I I , X V I I I , X I X , X X I I ,
X X V I I , X X V I I I , X X X V , and X L
[1 st sess., 51st Cong., .1. of S.. 483, Aug. 12, 1890.]
Mr. Blair submitted the following resolution for consideration,
which was ordered to he printed:
Resolved, That the following rule be adopted to fix the limit o f de
bate, namely :
Rule — . When a proposition has been under debate two days nnd not
less than four hours, which shall he determined by the pres ding officer
without debate, ;t shall he in order to move the previous question,
unless the Senate shall otherwise fix the time when debate shall cease
and the vote he taken ; and in any case arising under tnis rule m e
Senator in charge cf the measure shall have one hour in which to close
the debate.
During the last 14 days preceding tlie time fixed bv law cr hv con
current resolution passed by ihe Senate for the end of the session, a
majority of the Senate may close the debate at any time. suVect to
the right of the Srnator in charge ef the m easure: and any motion for
the previous question, or to limit debate and to fix (he time for the
vote to be taken, shail cease ic one hour and be subject to the Anthony
rule.
[1 st sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 0 “ 3, Aug. 12, 1S90.]
Mr. Quay submitted tbe following resolution for consideration, which
was ordered to be printed :
“ Resolved, That during the present session of Congress the Senate
will not take up for consideration any legislative business other than
the pending bill (the tariff bill) and general appropriation bills, bills
relating to public buildings and public lands, and Senate or concurrent
resolutions.
“ Resolved, That the consideration of all bills other than such as are
mentioned in the foregoing resolution is hereby pos poned until the
session of Congress to be held on (he first Monday in December. 1890.
“ Resolved. That the vote on the pending bill and all amendments
thereto shall be taken on the 30th dav of August instant at 2 o ’clock
p. m„ the voting to continue without further debate until the considers
tion of the bill and tbe amendments is comp!e>rd.
[1 st sess. 51st Cong., J. of S „ 4G5, Aug. 13, 1890.]
The rresident nro tempore laid before the Senate the order and
resolutions yesterday submitted, as fellow s:
“ Order by M r. Edmunds, to limit debate on the pending bill to re
duce the revenue and equalize duties on imports and the amendments
proposed thereto.
Resolution by Mr. Blair, to amend the rules so as to fix a limit to
debate.
Resolution by Mr. Quay, prescribing the measure to be considered
during the remainder of the present session; and.
Ordered, That ibe.v he referred to the Committee on Ru’ es.
[1 st sess. 51st Cong.. J. of S.. 471. Aug. 16, 1 890.]
Mr. Qha.v gave notice in writing, pursuant to Rule X L , that he would
offer the following orders for adoption by the Senate:
Ordered, 1. That during the present session of Congress the Senate
will not take up for consideration any legislative business other than
the pending bill (II. R. 9 4 1 6 ), conference reports, general appropriation
81722— 14548
17
M ils, pension bills, bills relating to the public lands, to the United
States courts, to the Postal Service, to agriculture and forestry, to
public buildings, and Senate or concurrent resolutions.
Ordered 2. That the consideration of all bills other than such as
are mentioned in the foregoing order is hereby postponed until the
session of Congress to be held on the first Monday of December. 1890.
Ordered, 3. That a vote shall be taken on the bill (H . R. 0416) now
under consideration in the Senate and upon amendments then pend
ing, without further debate, on the 60th day or' August. 1890, the vot
ing to commence at 2 o'clock p. m. on said day and continue on that
and subsequent days, to the exclusion of all other business, until the
bill and pending amendments are finally disposed of.
And that it was proposed to modify, for the foregoing stated pur
pose. the following roll's, nam ely: V II, V III, IX , X , XII, X IX , X X I I ,
X X V I I , X X V I I I , X X X V and X L .
Oidered. That the notice, with the proposed orders, be printed.
l i s t sess., 51st Cong., J. of S., 472, Aug. 18, 1890.]
Mr. Quay, pursuant to notice, submitted the following resolution,
which was ordered to be printed :
Hesolred, That the following orders be adopted for the government
of the Senate during the present session of Congress:
Ordered, 1. That during the present session of Congress the Senate
will not take up for consideration any legislative business other than
the pending bill <II. It. 9 4 1 6 ), conference reports, general appropriation
hills, pension bills, bills relating to the public lands, to the United
States- courts, to the Postal Service, to agriculture and forestry, to
public buildings, and Senate or concurrent resolutions.
Ordered, 2. That the consideration of all bills other than such as
mentioned in the foregoing order is hereby postponed until the session
of Congress to be held on the first Monday of December, 1890.
Ordered, 8. That a vote shall be taken on the bill (II. R. 9116) now
under consideration in the Senate and upon amendments then pendin"
without further debate on the 80th day of August, 1800, the voting
to commence at 2 o’clock p. ni on said day and to continue on that and
subsequent days, to the exclusion of all other business, until the bill
and pending amendments are finally disposed of.
For the foregoing stated purpose the following rules, namely, V II,
V III. IX , X , X I I , X I X , X X I I , X X V I I , X X V I I I , X X X V , and X L , are
modified.
[1st sess. 51st Co >g., J. of S., 476. Aug. 20, 1890.]
The President pro tempore laid before the Senate the resolution sub
mitted by Mr. Quay on the 18th instant, as follow s:
Hesolred, That the following orders be adopted for the government
of the Senate during the present term of C o n gr-ss:
Ordered, 1. That during the present session of Congress the Senate
will not take up for consideration any legislative business other than
the pending bill (II. R. 9 4 1 6 ), conference reports, general appropria
tion bills, pension bills, bills relating to public lands, United States
courts, the Postal Service, to agriculture and forestry, to public build
ings, and Senate or concurrent resolutions.
Ordered, 2. That the consideration of all bills other than such as
are mentioned in the foregoing order is hereby postponed until the
6ission of Congress to be held on the first Monday of December, 1890.
Ordered, 8. That a vote shall be taken on the bill (II. R. 9416) now
under considi ration in the Senate anil upon amendments then pending,
without further debate, on the 80th day of August, 1890, the voting
to commence at 2 o'clock p. m. eu said day and to continue on that and
subsequent days, to the exclusion of all other business, until the bill
and pending amendments arc finally disposed of.
For the foregoing stated purpose the following rules, namely, V II,
V III, IX , X , X I I , X I X , X X I I , X X V I I , X X V I I I , X X X V , and X L , are
modified.
The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution ; and an amendment
having been proposed by Senator Hoar, v iz : Strike out all after the
word ‘ ‘ resolved” and in lieu thereof insert “ that the rules of the
Senate be amended by adding the follow ing:
“ When any hill or resolution shall 1 ave been under consideration
for a reasonable time it shall he in order for any Senator to demand
that debate thereon he closed. It such demand be seconded by a
m ajority of the Senators present, the question shall forthwith he
taken thereon without further debate, and the pending measures shall
take precedence of all other busim ss whatever.
If the Senate shall
decide to close debate, the question shall he put upon the pending
amendments, upon amendments of which notice will then be given, and
81722— 14548--------2
are
upon the measure- in its successive stages, according to the rules -of
the Senate, but without further debate, except that every Senator who
may desire shall be permitted to speak upon a measure not more than
once and rot, exceeding one hour.
“ After such demand shall have been made by any Senator no other
motion shall be in order until tiie same shall have been voted upon by
the Senate, unless the same s^all fail to be seconded.
“ After the Senate shall have decided to close debate, no motion shall
he in order but a motion to adjoin n or to take recess, when such motion
shall be seconded by a majority of the Senate.
When cither of said
motions shall have been lost or shall have failed of a second, it shall
not he in order to renew the same until one Senator shall have spoken
upon the pending measure or one vote upon the same shall have inter
vened.
“ For the foregoing stated purpose the following rules, namclv. V II,
V II I. IX . X , X I I , X I X , X X I I , X X V I I , X X V I I I , X X X V , and X L are
modified.”
On motion by Mr. Iloar lo amend the part proposed to he stricken out
by inserting, after the words “ the pending biil (H . It. 9 41U ),” the words
“ the hill to amend and supplement the election laws of the United
States (II. It. 1 1 0 4 5 )," and by adding, at the end of the resolutions, the
words “ and immediately thereafter the bill to amend and supplement
the election laws of the United States shall he taken up for considera
tion, and shail remain before the Senate every.day for three days, after
the reading of the Journal. to the exclusion of all other business, and on
the fourth day of September, at 2 o'clock, voting thereon, and on the
then pending amendments, shall begin and shall continue from day to
day, to the exclusion of other business, until the same arc finally dis
posed o f.”
After debate.
On motion by Mr. Spooner, (hat the resolution, with the proposed
amendment, he referred to the Committee on Rules,
Tending debate.
The President pro tempore announced that the hour of 12 o'clock had
arrived, and laid before the Senate the unfinished business at its ad
journment yesterday, viz, the bill (IT. R.
to reduce the revenue
and equalize duties on imports, and for other purposes.
[CoxciiESSiONAL R kcohd, 1st sess. 51st Cong.. S 841-S S 49.]
l i s t scss. J ilst Cong., J. of S „ Sept. 23, 1S 9 0 .]The Senate proceoed lo consider the resolution submitted by Mr. Quay
August IS, 1890, prescribing an order of business during the remainder
of the present session : and
Ordered, That it be postponed indefinitely.
[2d scss. 51st Cong., J. of S.. 4G, Dec. 23, 1890.]
Mr. Aldrich gave notice, in accordance with the provisions of Rule
X L . that he would move certain amendments to the rules, which would
modify Rules V II, V III. IX , X , X I I . X I X , X X I I , X X V I I , X X X V , and
X L , and for that purpose he would hereafter submit the following
resolution :
•
R e s o l r c d . That for the remainder of this session the rules of the
Senate be amended by ading thereto the following :
“ When any bill, resolution, or other question shall have been under
consideration for a reasonable time it shall be in order for any Senator
to demand that debate thereon be closed. On such demand no debate
shall be in order, and pending such demand no other motion, except
one motion to adjourn, shall be made.
If such demand be secouded
by a majority of the Senators present, the question shall forthwith be
taken thereon without debate.
If the Senate shall decide to close
debate on the bill, resolution, or other question, the measure shall take
precedence of all other business whatever, and the question shall be
put upon the amendments, if any. then pending, and upon the measure
in its successive stages, according to the rules of the Senate, but
without further debate, except that every Senator who may desire
shall be permitted to speak upon the measure, including all amendments,
not more than once, and not exceeding 30 minutes.
“ A fter the Senate shall have decided to close debate as herein pro
vide. no motion shall be in order but a motion to adjourn or to take
n recess, when such motion shall he seconded by a majority of the
Senate.
When either of said motions shall have been lost, or shall
have failed of a second, it shall not be in order to renew the same
until one Senator shall have spoken upon the pending measure, or one
vote upon the same shall have intervened.
“ Tending proceedings under the foregoing rule no proceeding in
respect of a quorum shall be In order until It shall have appeared on a
81722— 14543
I
division or on the taking of the yeas and nays that a quorum is not
present and voting.
“ Pending proceedings under the foregoing rule. all questions of
order, whether on appeal or otherwise, shall be decided without debate,
and no obstructive or dilatory motion or proceeding of any kind shall
be in order.
“ I'or the foregoing stated prrnosrs the following rules, nametv, VIT,
V II I. IX . X I I , X I X , X X I I , X X V I I , X X V I I I , X X X V , and X L , aro
modified.”
Ordered, That the proposed resolution be printed.
[2d sess. 51st Cong., ,T. c f S., 51, Dec. 20, 1SC0.]
Mr. Aldrich, pursuant to notice given on the 2fid instant, submitted
the following resolution, which was ordered to be printed :
Rcsoh'cd, That for the remainder of this session the rules of tho
Senate be amended by adding thereto the follow ing:
" When any bill, lesolution or other question shall have been under
consideration for a considerable time it shall le in order for any Sena
tor to demand that debate thereon be closed. On such demand no de
bate shall be in order, and pending such demand no other motion, except
one motion to adjourn, shall bo made. If such demand he seconded by a
m ajority ot' the Senators present, the question shall forthwith be taken
thereon without delate.
If the* Senate shall decide to dose debate oil
any bill, resolution, or other question, the measure shall take precedence
of all other business whatever, and the question shall be put upon the
amendments, if any. then pending, and upon the measure in its suc
cessive stages, according to the rules of the Senate, but without further
debate, except that every Senator who may desire shall be permitted to
speak upon the measure, including all amendments, not more than once,
and not exceeding 110 minutes.
‘‘A fter the Senate shall have decided to close debate as herein pro
vided, no motion shall be in order but a molion to adjourn or to take a
recess, when such motions shall be seconded by a majority of the Senate.
When either of said motions shall have been Tost or shall nave failed of
a second, it shall not he in order to renew the same until one Senator
shall have spoken upon the pending measure, or one vole upon the same
shall have intervene!.
“ Tending proceedings under the foregoing rule, no proceeding in re
spect of the quorum shall he in order until it shall have appeared on a
division, or on the taking of the yeas and nays, that a quorum is not
present and voting.
“ Tending proceedings under the forccoing rule, all questions of order,
whether upon appeal or otherwise shall lie «1er! d?d without debate: and
no obstructive or dilatory motion or proceedings of any kind shall he in
order.
“ For tho fororoing stated purposes the following rules, namclv, V II,
V III. IX . X , X I I , X I X , X X I I , X X V I I , X X V I I I , X X X V , aud X L , aro
modified.”
[2d sess 51st Cong., J. of S.. 87. Jan. 20, 1891.]
On motion by Mr. Aldrich, that the Senate proceed to the considera
tion of the resolution submittied by him December 29. 1S9(>. to amend
the rules so as :o provide a limitation of debate under certain condi
tions. and for that purpose to modify rules V II. V III, IX , X , X II, X i X ,
X X I I , X X V I I . X X V I I I , X X X V . and X L
It was determined in the affirmative;
When.
Mr. Harris raised a question of order, namely, that the notice given by
Mr. Aldrich was not sufficiently specific to meet the requirements of
Itule X L . as it did not specify the parts of the rules proposed to ho
suspended, modified, or amended, and the purposes thereof, and that
the proposed rule materially modifies Rules V and X X , and neither of
these rules are mentioned in the notice as rules proposed to be sus
pended. modified, or amended.
.
.
,
. ,
Pending which [the hour of 2 o’clock having arrived, e tc 1
[C ongressional R ecoup, 2d sess., 51st Cong., 15G4-L)GS.]
[2d sess. 51st Cong. J. of S.. 89, Jan. 22, 1891.]
On motion by Mr. Aldrich, that the Sena e proceed t o the considera
tion o f the resolution submitted by him December 29. IS.Hi, t o amend
the rules so as to provide a limitation of debate under certain condi
tions, and f o r that purpose t o modify R u l e s M l , N I I I , I a , a , a i i , a i a ,
X X I I , X X V I I , X X V I I I . X X X V . and X L .
„
,
r . .
,
Mr. Harris raised a question of order, namely, that the unfinished
business was the motion of Mr. Gorman, to correct the Journal of tho
81722— 1454S
. -
I
flay before yesterday, it being a question of tbe highest privilege, nnd
under Rule III to be proceeded with until it is concluded.
The Vice President overruled the question of order, nnd stated that
fte did not find any rule bearing upon the question of amending or ap
proving any other Journal than that of the preceding day, nnd is therefore or the opinion that the motion made by tbe Senator from Rhode
isla n d was in order, the morning hour having expired.
From the decision of the Chair Mr. Harris appealed to the Senate;
and.
On the question, “ Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judg
ment of the S e n a te ?”
f
It was determined in the affirmative, {x 'ayg--------------------- " ---------------30
On motion bv Mr. Cockrell,
T he yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present,
(The names are omitted. 1
So the decision of the Chair was sustained.
[C ongressional R ecoup, _d scss. 51st C g., 1G
on
54-1G
31.]
[2d sess. 51st Cong., .T. o f S., 90, Jan. 22, 1S91.]
The question recurring on the motion of Mr. Aldrich, that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of the resolution.
On motion by Mr. Gorman, to lay the motion on the table,
It w as determined in the negative,
-- -----------------jj?
On motion by Mr. Gorman,
The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present,
The names are omitted ]
•o the motion to lay on the table was not agreed to.
Mr. Ransom raped a question of order, namely, that the motion to
take up the resolution was not in order because the Journal of the 20th
instant as read on the 21st shows that the resolution was taken up on
the 20th, and if tha* Le true, it then became and now is the unfinished
business.
The Vice President overruled the question of order.
From the decision of the Chair Mr. Ransom appealed to the Senate;
and.
On the question, Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment
erf the Senate?
It was determined in the affirmative, j^ a y s
On motion by Mr. Ransom,
The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the Senators present,
Those who voted in the affirmative are,
[The names are omitted.]
/■ So the question of order was overruled.
M r. Gorman asked that the motion of M r. Aldrich be put in writing.
The motion having been reduced to writing, and the question recur
ring on agreeing on the same,
It was determined in the affirmative, j\ jayg'
y®
On motion by Mr. Aldrich.
The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth o f the Senators present,
[T h e names are omitted. 1
So the motion was agreed t o ; and
The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution ; nnd
The question being on the ncint o f order raised l v Mr. Harris on the
20th instant, namely, that the notice given by Mr. Aldrich was not
sufficiently specific to meet the requirements of Ride X L , as it did not
specify the parts of the rules supposed to be suspended, modified, or
amended, and the purposes th ereo f; and that the proposed rule mate
rially modifies Rules V and X X , and neither of these rules is men
tioned in the notice as rules proposed to be suspended, modified, or
amended,
The Vipc President overruled the question of order, and decided that
It was not well taken, as in the opinion of the Chair the purpose and
spirit of the rule are stated in the resolution submitted by Mr. Aldrich.
From the decision of the Chair Mr. Faulkner appealed to the Senate,
and
A fte r debate.
A t 2 o'clock and 55 minutes p. m., Mr. Gorman raised a Question as
to the presence of a quorum ;
Whereupon,
The Presiding Officer (M r. Manson I d the chair) directed the roll to
be called.
81722— 14548
I
Wlicn
Fifty-one Senators answered to their names.
A quorum being present, and the question recurring upon the appeal
taken by Mr. Faulkner from the decision of the Chair,
After further debate.
On motion by Mr. Aldrich that the appeal lie on the table,
Mr. Gorman asked that the motion be put in w riting: and
The motion having been reduced to writing by Mr. Aldrich,
On the question to agree to the same.
It was determined in the affirmative,
—
On motion by M r. Gorman,
The yeas and nays boina desired by one-fifth o f the Senators present,
I The names are om itted.]
So the motion was not agreed to.
The question recurring on agreeing to the resolution submitted by
Mr. Aldrich.
Pending debate.
( Congees s i 6 nal R ecoed , 2d sess. 51st Cong., 1 664-1G 82.)
[2d sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 91, Jan. 22, 1891.]
The Senate resumed the consideration o f the resolution submitted
by Mr. Aldrich to amend the rules so as to provide a limitation of
debate.
An amendment having been proposed by Mr. Stewart,
On motion by Mr. Faulkner, the yeas und nays were ordered.
Pending debate.
On motion by Mr. Aldrich, at 5 o'clock and 15 minutes p. m.,
The Senate tcck a recess until L2 m., Monday.
M onday, 12 o'clock m.
The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution submitted by
Mr. Aldrich to amend the rules so as to provide a limitation of debate;
und
The question being on the amendment proposed bv Mr. Stewart,
[C ongressional R ecord, 2d sess.. 51st Cong., 1 6 8 2 -1 7 3 8 .]
[2d sess. 51st Cong., J. of S.. 91, Jan. 22, 1891.]
The Senate resumed the consideration of the motion submitted by Mr.
Gorman to amend tlie Journal of the proceedin s of Tuesday, the 20th
Inslant, Ly striking out, afler the motion submitted by Mr. Aldrich that
the Senate resume the consideration of the resolution to ameDd the rules
so as to provide a limitation of debate, the words “ It was determined
In the affirm ative” : when.
By unanimous consent, the order for the yeas and nays was with
drawn ; and,
The motion to amend having been agreed to,
The Journal was approved.
The Senate esumed the ccnslderation o f the question of the approval
of the Journal o f the proceedings of Wednesday, the 21st in stan t; and
The Journal was approved.
[2d sess. 51st Cong., J. of S., 173, Feb. 26, 1891.]
On motion by M r. Ali son,
The Senate iesumed. as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration
of the bill (II. R. 13462) making appropriations for sundry civil ex
penses of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1802, and
for other purposes;
W hen,
On motion by Mr. Allison and by unanimous consent.
Ordered, That dining the consideration of the pending bill debate on
amendments thereto shall be limited to five minutes for each Senator on
the pending question, and that no Senator shall speak more than once
on the same amendment.
Mr. OWEN. Now, Mr. President, that record which I have
submitted without reading comes down to 1S91, when Mr.
Aldrich proposed a cloture rule for the limitation o f debate.
I want to call attention to several other propositions which have
been made since that time, one by the Senator from New Hamp
shire [Mr. Gallingkr], now representing the State of New
Hampshire in this body, on October 14, 1S513, found on page 2504
of the C o n g r e s s i o n a l R e c o r d , Fifty-third Congress, first session,
ns follow s: 1
When any bill or resolution reported from a standing or select com
mittee Is under consideration, if a majority o f the entire membership
81722— 14548
o f the Senate submit a request in writing, through the Chair, that
debate close, such papers shall he referred to the Committee on Rules,
Rnd it shall be the duty of said committee within a period not exceed
ing five days from the date of said reference to report an order naming
a day and hour when a vote shall be taken, and action upon said report
shall be had without amendment or debate.
Senator Gallinger was very wueli in favor of a cloture in
those days.
Senator Hoar also proposed a resolution on cloture. Nor were
they alone in that respect as distinguished leaders of the opposi
tion, but. Senator L o d c e also proposed the following rule in order
to prevent the abuse of the floor of the Senate:
And it shall not be in order at any time for any Senator to read a
speech, either written or printed.
Senator Vest, c f Missouri, in 1S93 introduced the following
resolution, the most moderate form of terminating so-called de
bate (CoNGREssroNAr. IiEcono, p. 45. Dec. 5, 1394) :
Amendment intended to he proposed to the rules c f the Senate,
namely, add to Rule I the following section:
“ S ec. 2. Whenever any bill, motion, or resolution is pending before
the Senate as unfinished business and the same shall have been debated
on divers days, amounting in all to HO, it shall be in order for any
Senator to move that a time be fixed for the taking of a veto upon such
bill, motion, or resolution, and such motion shall not be amendable or
debatable, but shall be Immediately p u t: and if adopted by a majority
vole of all the Members of the Senate, the vote upon such bill, motion,
or resolution, with all Hie amendments thereto which may have been
proposed at the time of such motion, shall be had at the date fixed in
such original motion without further debate or amendment, except by
unanimous consent, and during the pendency of such motion to fix a
date, and also at the time fixed by the Senate for voting upon such bill,
motion, or rrsclulion no other business of any kind or character shall
be entertained, except by unanimous consent, until such motion, bill, or
resolution shall have been finally acted upon.”
Hon. Orville H. Platt, on September 21, 1S93, introduced the
following resolution (p. 1G3G) :
Whenever any bill or resolution is pending before the Senate as un
finished business the presiding officer shall, upon the written request
of a majority of the Senators, fix a day and hour, and notify the Sen
ate thereof, when general debate shall cease thereon, which time shall
not be less than five days from the submission of such request, and he
shall also fix a subsequent d iy and liour.-and notify the Senate thereof,
when the vote shall be taken on the bill or resolution and any amend
ment thereto without further debate, the time for taking the vote to
be not more (ban two days later Ilian the time when general debate is
to cease, and in the interval between the closing of general debate and
the taking cf the vote no Senator shall speak more than five minutes
nor more than once upon the same preposition.
And, among other things, said:
The rules o f the Senate, as of every legis’ atlve body, ought to facili
tate the transaction of business.
1 think that proposition will not be
denied. The rules of the Senate r s they stand to-d iy make it im
possible, or nearly impossible, to transact business. 1 think that propo
sition will not be denied.
W e as a Senate are fart losing the respect
of the people of the United States. We are fast being considered a body
that exists for the purpo-e of retarding and obstructing legislation. Wo
are being compared in the minds of the people of this country to the
IIousc c f Lords in Kngland, and the reason for it is that under our
rules It is impossible or nearly impossible to obtain action when there
Is anv considerable oppo-ttion to a bill here.
I think that I may safely say that there is a large m ajority upon t h i3
side of the Senate who would favor the adoption of such a rule at the
present time.
Mr. Hoar. o f Massaebusetts (1S93). submitted to the commit
tee a proposed substitute, as follows (p. 3G37):
Resolved, That the rifles of the Senate be amended by adding the
follo w in g:
-*• When any bill or resolution shall have been under consideration
for more than one day It shall be In order for any Senator to demand
81722— 1 4 3 4 8
that debate thereon be closed.
If such demand be seconded by a
majority of the Senators present, the question shall forthwith be taken
thereon without further debate, and the pending measure shall take
precedence of all other business whatever. If the Senate shall decide to
close debate, the question shall be put upon the pending amendments,
upon amendments of which notice shall then be given, and upon the
measure in its successive stages according to the rules of the Senate,
but without further debate, except that every Senator who may desire
shall be permitted to speak upon the measure not more than once and
not exceeding one hour.
“ After such demand shall have been made by any Senator no other
motion shall be in order until the same shall have been voted upon by
the Senate, unless the same shall fail to be seconded.
“ After the Senate shall have decided to close debate no motion shall
be in order, but a motion to adjourn or to take a recess, when such
motion shall be seconded by a majority of the Senate. When either of
said motions shall have been lost or shall have failed of a second it
shall not be in order to renew the same until one Senator shall have
spoken unon the pending measure or one vote upon the same shall have
intervened.
“ For the foregoing stated purpose the following rules, namelv. VII,
V III. IX , X , X I I , X I X , X X I I . X X V I I , X X V I I I , X X X V , and X L , are
modified.”
Mr. L odge, of Massachusetts, also then, as now, Senator of
the United States from Massachusetts, supported this proposal,
using the following language (p. 2637) :
It is because I believe that the moment for action h?is arrived that
I desire now simply to say a word expressive of my very strong belief
in the principle of the resolution offered by the Senator from Connecti
cut, Mr. I'latt.
We govern in this country in our representative bodies by voting and
debate. It is most desirable to have them both. Both a r c'o f great im
portance. But if we are to have only one. then the one which leads to
action is the more important. To vote without debating may be hasty,
may be ill considered, may be rash, but to debate and never vote is
imbecility.
1 am well aware that there are measures now pending, measures
with reference to the tariff, which I consider more injurious to the
country than the financial measure now before us.
I am aware that
there is a measure which lias been rushed into the House of Representa
tives at the very moment when they are calling on us Republicans for
nonpartisanship’ which is partisan in the highest degree and which in
volves evils which I regard as infinitely worse than anything that can
arise from any economic measure, because it is a blow at human rights
and personal liberty. I know that those measures are at hand, i know
that such a rule as is now proposed will enable a majority surely to
put them through this body after due debate and will lodge in the hands
of a majority tno power and the high responsibility which I believe the
majority ought always to have.
But. Mr. President, I do not shrink
from the conclusion in the least. If it is right now to take a step like
this as 1 believe it is. in order to pass a measure which the whole
country is demanding, then, as it seems to me. it is right to pass it for
all measures. If It is not right for this measure, then it is not right to
pass it for any other.
. , , ,
„
^ , .. .
I believe that the most important principle in our Government is that
the majoritv should rule. It is for that reason that I have done what
lay in my power to promote what I thought was for the protection of
elections,'because I think the nrajorit.v should rule at the ballot box. I
think equally that the m ajority should rule on this floor— not by violent
methods, but bv propci dignified rules, such as are proposed by my
colleague and b’v the Senator from Connecticut. The country demands
action and we give them words.
For these yeasons, Mr. President. I
have ventured to detain llie Senate in order to express my most cordial
approbation of ti e principle involved in the proposed rules which have
Just been teferred to the committee.
Senator David Ii. Hill, of New York (1S93), proposed tile fol
lowing amendment tp. 1639) :
Add to Rule IX the following section:
“ S ec . 2. Whenever any bill or resolution is pending before the Sen
ate as unfinished business and the same shall have been debated on
divers days amounting in all to 30 days, it shall be in order for any
Senator to move to fix a date for the taking of a vote upon such bill or
81722— 14543
resolution, and such motion shall not be amended or debatable; and If
passed by a majority of all the Senators elected the vote upon such bil!
or resolution, with all the amendments thereto which may be pending
at the time of such motion, shall be immediately had without further
debate or amendment, except by unanimous consent.”
Only last Congress. April G 1911, the distinguished Senator
,
from New York, Mr. R oot, introduced the following resolution:
Resolved, That the Committee cn Rules be, and it is hereby, instructed
to report for the consideration of the Senate a rule or rules to secure
more effective control by the Senate over its procedure, and especially
over its procedure upon conference reports and upon bills which have
been passed by the House ana have been favorably reported in the Sen
ate.
(C O N G R E S S IO N A L R E C O R D , VOl. 47, pt. 1, p. 107.)
And Senator L odge argued very strongly in favor of a cloture.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President-----The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla
homa yield to the Senator from Colorado?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Colorado.
Mr. THOMAS. If the Senator will turn to pages 1637 and
1638 of the same volume that he holds in his hands, he will
find, if my memory serves me right, a resolution upon the sub
ject offered by Mr. L odge, or else a speech in favor o f a reso
lution previously offered by Senator Platt—a speech which
contains a great deal of matter which is pertinent to the present
situation.
Mr. OWEN. Senator Platt, on the 20th o f September, 1S93,
proposed the following resolution:
Resolved, That Rule IX of the Senate be amended by adding the
following section :
S ec . 2. Whenever any bill or resolution is pending before the Senate
as unfinished business the Presiding Officer shall, upon the written re
quest of a majority of the Senators, fix a day and hour and notify
the Senate thereof when general debate shall cease thereon, which time
shall not be less than five days from the submission request, and ho
shall also fix a subsequent day and hour, and notify the Senate thereof,
when the vote shall be taken on the bill or resolution and any amend
ment thereto without further debate; the time for taking the vote to
be not more than two days later than the time when genera! debate is
to cease, and in the interval between the closing of general debate and
the taking of the vote no Senator shall speak more than five minutes
or more than once upon the same proposition.
Senator Platt argued strongly for this; nor was he alone.
Senator L odge, on page 2536. made an argument in favor of
cloture, to this effect:
I believe, of course, that the [froper way is to go straight at it and
to put in the hands of the majority of the Senate the power to close
debate and the power to take a vote after duo debate.
But as it appears that there is not a majority in the Senate for
closure, as no action has been taken by the Committee on Rules in
that direction, and as there appears to be a prejudice against any
method of bringing the Senate to a vote because It Is in conflict witn
Senate traditions. I have ventured to offer two amendments which I
think will at least tend to prevent obstruction, although they are not as
thorough and complete as they ought to be.
This question of obstruction has culminated in the great representa
tive bodies of the English-speaking people within the last few years.
It has been met and disposed of In the House of Commons by tho
closure rules, which recently have been applied in practice at every
stage of the home rule bill.
It has been met and disposed of in the
House of Representatives.
Those two great representative bodies of
the English-speaking people, owing to reforms which have been car
ried out within the last half dozen years, are able to-day to transact
business, to transact it according to the will of the majority, and
thereby to place upon the majority the public responsibility which they
ought to bear.
81722— 14548
And more to like effect from the distinguished Senator from
Massachusetts.
The Senator from Massachusetts was not content with ex
pressing himself in that respect in the United States Senate,
but he wrote a very interesting article for the North American
Review, in the issue of November, 1SD3, page 023,. in which
he sets up with great force the importance of allowing a ma
jority to rule, in which he advocates the Reed rules in the
House of Representatives, which since that time have been,
wisely enough, adopted by every succeeding Congress, whether
Democratic or Republican, because the common sense of a
parliament requires that the majority shall not be throttled
by the minority, for the simple reason the majority must be
permitted to exercise the functions for which they are chosen
by the American people, if representative government is to
stand. I shall ask to put this short article by Mr. Lodge as an
addendum to my remarks, if there is no objection. It is a
very short one.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair hears no objection.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. L odge, after arguing strenuously fo r the
cloture------
Mr. GALLINGER. Will the Senator give the date o f that
article?
Mr. CWEN. November, 1S93.
A fte r arguin g strenuously for the cloture, M r. L odge points
out the practice o f the previous question, and s a y s :
But the essence of a system of courtesy i3 that it should be tho
Bame at all points. The two great rights in our representative bodies
are voting and debate.
If the courtesy of unlimited debate is granted,
it must carry with it the reciprocal courtesy o f permitting a voie after
due discussion.
If this is not the case, the system is impossible. Of
the two rights, moreover, that of votin'; is the higher and more im
portant. W e ought to have both, and debate certainly in ample mens
u rc: hut if we nrc forced to choose between them, the right of action
must prevail over the right of discussion. To vote without debating
is perilous, but to debate and never vote is imbecile.
I commend the language o f the Senator from Massachusetts
to the Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield-----The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla
homa yield to the Senator from New Hampshire?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. GALLINGER. The Senator has quoted an amendment
to the rules which I wrote shortly after coming into this body,
which was sent to the Committee on Rules and never came out
of that committee. I did hold to that view at that time; but
I listened to a wonderful speech from Senator Turpie, o f Indi
ana, about that time in opposition to cloture, which did very
much toward converting me to the opposite view.
The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. L o d g e ] came into the
Senate fresh from the House in 1S93. imbued with the idea
that the Reed rules were the acme o f perfection, and he advo
cated that practice. It was during a famous debate on tho
repeal o f the silver-purchase clause in the law that was then
on the statute books, and our Democratic friends were filibus
tering against it with great earnestness and with a good deal o f
success.
81722— 14548
26
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President-----The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla
homa yield to the Senator from Colorado?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Colorado.
Mr. THOMAS. I simply wish to remind the Senator from
New Hampshire that that filibuster was not a party filibuster.
There were a great many Senators upon the Republican side
engaged in it. One was from my State, who afterwards took
his seat upon this side. It was not a Democratic filibuster.
Mr. GALLINGER. There were four or five so-called Repub
licans at that time-----Mr. THOMAS. Oh, there were more than that. Mr. Presi
dent. and there was nothing ‘ ‘ so called” about them. They
were Republicans.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President. I thank the Senator for
permitting me the opportunity o f saying that when I first came
here I did entertain the view the Senator has attributed to
me; but I listened very attentively to the views of Senators,
many o f whom had been here a iong time, and I found that they
were almost unanimously against that procedure. They assured
me that no harm had ever come from it, and I changed my
views, and I have entertained those changed views from that
day to the present time.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, against the views of Mr. Turpie,
the Senator referred to by the Senator from New Hampshire,
I wish to quote the language of another distinguished Senator
of that date on the Democratic side—Senator White, now the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. lie
said, on October 13. 1893 ( C o n g r e s s i o n a l R ecord , p. 2477),
in commenting on the filibuster of that date:
Sir, we have for days and days in this great body, upon which the
eyes of the whole world have been turned in the past as the most
exalted and the most dignitiecl and the most responsible legislative
body on the face o f God's earth, witnessed scenes in it which, in my
judgment, have made it an object of contempt to every civilized man
and to every honest judgment. So far as I am concerned. I hope that
this action to-night will Initiate the first step to reach a point in
which this great lodv. gathering its self-respect about it. will so deport
itself as to save at least some of the honor and some o f the character
which has been its ornament for so many years
W hile it is sought to
drag it down in the mire and dust. I hope it will so deport itself as to
vindicate its duty. If gentlemen sit in this room and call attention to
the absence of a quorum, and then remain silent on t ’ >e roll called
to ascertain whether there is a quorum, I hope there will be firmness
and manhood hero to visit that punishment which, in my judgment,
such conduct de-erves.
If i t he done. then, sir, those who use such
methods will seek some other fipld for their display than this. If it be
not done, the self-respect of this body is, in my judgment, gone.
Senator David B. Hill likewise objected very strongly to the
abuse o f the time of the Senate by the filibuster, and he was
not alone in that. I call atteutiou to the proposal o f Senator
Ilill in 1893. page 1G39:
Add to Itulc IX the following section :
• S ec . 2. Whenever any bill or resolution i s pending before the Sen
•
ate as unfinished business and the same shall have been debated on
divers days amounting in all to SO days, it shall he In order for any
Senator to move to fix a date for the taking of a vote upon such bill or
resolution, and such motion shall not he amended or debatable: and if
passed by a majority of all the Senators elected the vote upon such hill
or resolution, with all the amendments thereto which may be pending
nt the time of such motion, shall he immediately had without further
debate or amendment, except by unanimous consent.”
81722— 14548
27
Nor does this by any means end the matter on the two sides
of the Chamber. There are many distinguished Senators who,
in the course of the debates on these questions, expressed simi
lar sentiments. I shall not encumber the Recobdwith making
quotations from them, except to show that the leaders on both
sides of this Chamber, as the exigencies seemed to require, have
not hesitated to urge amendment o f the rules to provide for a
previous question after reasonable debate has been had,*
Mr. WEEKS. Mr. President-----The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla
homa yield to the Senator from Massachusetts?.
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. WEEKS. I wish to ask the Senator if any Senator has
ever made that contention when he was in the minority party
of the Senate? Has it not always been when he was in the
majority?
♦
Mr. OWEN. Oh, I think so, very generally. That does not
change the force of the opinions and arguments cited, however.
If you gentlemen, through your leadership on that side, declare
vehemently ia favor of the virtue of a cloture when you are in
the majority, and if the gentlemen on this side declare
vigorously in favor of a cloture when they are in the
majority, does it not argue that both sides have committed them
selves earnestly to the reasonable, common-sense rule that the
majority shall command this Chamber? And if both sides have
committed themselves, with what face will you deny the reason
of the rule which you have yourselves advocated with such force
and with such earnestness? Do you wish to argue that both
sides were fraudulently making the argument and that neither
side is entitled to the respect o f honest men, and that their
opinions are worthless because merely indicating a desire for
partisan advantage?
I f this be true, let us follow the rule of all other great par
liamentary bodies—of Great Britain, of France, of Germany, of
Austria, of Italy, of Switzerland, o f Hungary, of Spain, of Den
mark—of the great States of our own Union, who do not permit
filibuster or the rule of the minority over the majority.
Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. President-----The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla
homa yield to the Senator from Florida?
Mr. 0\7EN. I yield to the Senator from Florida.
Mr. FLETCHER. May I ask the Senator if ne does not think
that ..hen the rule was originally adopted providing that a
Senator could speak once in one day upon a question in debate, it
was contemplated that the speech would be confined to the ques
tion pending and then before the Senate?
Mr. OWEN. Oh, absolutely. No one imagined in the early
days of the Senate that the minority would have the shameless
impudence to try to rule the majority.
Mr. FLETCHER. And does not the Senator think this
abuse has grown up not because the rule ever contemplated
such abuse, but rather in spite of it, and that the abuse consists
largely in the fact that nowadays the so-called debate or dis
cussion or speech is not confined at all to the question before
the Senate, but all latitude is given for the discussion of any
old subject at any old time, whether it is really before the
Senate or not? Does not the Senator think tliat is really the
81722— 14548
28
abnse, and that that was never contemplated by the Senate
when the rules were originally adopted?
Mr. OWEN. That is quite true. When the rules of the
Senate were adopted in 17S9 they had the “ previous question” '
coming from the Continental Congress, which had the previous
question coining from the Parliament of Great Britain, which
had the previous question in 1690. The Senate maintained the
previous question for 17 years. It was then a small body of
very courteous men, only 34 in number, and they dropped tbe
previous question as not needed in so small a body of such
very courteous men. They had only used it three times in 17
years, and as a matter of courtesy they merely omitted the
previous question from the printed rules. It still was permis
sible under the general parliamentary law. They never imag
ined the Senator from Ohio speaking for 9 hours, the Senator
>
from California speaking for long hours on the shipping bill,
but confining his rambling observations to a dissertation on
Christian science, followed by the Senator from Utah by a
13-hour speech, and speech after speech consuming days for the
shameless purpose of killing time and killing majority rule and
defeating popular government.
Air. GALLINGER. Air. President, will the Senator permit
me to interrupt him further?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from New Hampshire.
Air. GALLINGER. I will suggest to the Senator from
Florida that if he should enforce that rule it would prevent
the Senator from Oklahoma from making his very interesting
discussion to-day.
Air. OWEN. Oh, that may be true, Air. President. I agree
with the Senator from New Hampshire that a speech on the
cloture would not be very much in point on the pending ques
tion of the shipping bill, but-----Air. FLETCHEIt. But that is the pending question.
Air. OWEN. Yes; it is so far in point that the Senator from
Atissouri [Air. R eed] has moved a temporary, particular, and
special cloture for the purpose of bringing to a conclusion the
endless filibuster on that side of the Chamber and getting a
vote on the shipping bill. I am not far afield in discussing
cloture in this way, for cloture is needed to get the vote on
the shipping bill.
Air. FLETCHER. That is the precise question.
Air. OWEN. I think I am really much more in point than tho
Senator from New Hampshire would indicate.
Air. President, I wish to submit for the R ecord the practice
o f every State in the Union. I have in my hand a compilation
of the rules on the "previous q u e s t i o n of the various States
comprising this Republic, and I submit them to show that the
common sense of the people of this Republic, the common sense
moving the legislatures of the various States, has spoken in
regard to this matter; and only when they have had no trouble
from an unfair filibuster is there the absence o f a rule of clo
ture; that is, where the rule of courtesy carries with it the
reciprocal courtesy of permitting the majority to vote after
reasonable debate has been had.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the inser
tion of the statement in the R e c o r d ?
81722— 14548
29
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President, before agreeing to the in
sertion I will ask the Senator, with his iiennission, if "he has
given the rules of the State senates as well as the houses of
representatives?
Mr. OWEN. Yes; both are given—both the senate and house,
wherever it occurs. I had it compiled by the legislative refer
ence division of the Library of Congress for the use of the
Senate.
Mr. GALLINGER. I will say to the Senator that I chance to
know that we have not a previous question in the State Senate
of New Hampshire.
Mr. OWEN. In the State Senate of New Hampshire, I take it,
the Senator will not allege that any filibusters have been carried
on so as to defeat the will of the majority. If so, I shall be glad
to have the Senator say that that is a fact.
Mr. GALLINGER. I think probably the Senator is correct.
We do not have before the Legislature of New Hampshire the
great questions that we have before this body.
Mr. OWEN. And therefore there is no need for the rule of
cloture, because your senate does not violate the courtesy of
freedom of debate by a filibuster-----Mr. GALLINGER. I do not know that there has been any
prolonged filibuster, but I do kuow that unlimited debate is
allowed under the rules. That is all I know about it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER Is there objection to the in
sertion in the R ecord o f the matter referred to by the Senator
from Oklahoma? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered.
The matter referred to is as follows:
P
r e v io u s
Q
u e s t io n
in
S tate
L e g is l a t u r e s .
ALABAMA.
.k
Senate.
No rule.
House.
20. The previous question shall be in the following form : “ Shall the
main question be now p u t ? ”
If demanded by a vote of a majority of
the members present, its effect shall be to cut off all debate and bring
the house to a direct v o te ; first, upon the pending amendments, if there
are any iu their order, and then on the main question, but the mover
Of the question or the chairman cf the committee having charge of the
bill or resolution shall have the right to close the debate after the call
of the previous question has been sustained for not more than 15
minutes. (Ilouse rules, 1915, p. 8.)
I
ARIZONA.
Senate.
82. There shall be a motion for the previous question, which being
ordered by a majority of senators voting, if a quorum he present, shall
have the effect to cut off all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote
upon the immediate question or questions on which it has been asked
and ordered. The previous question may be asked and ordered upon a
single motion, a series of motions allowable under the rules, or an
amendment or amendments, or may be made to embrace all authorized
motions or amendments and include the bill to its passage or rejection.
It shall be in order, pending the motion for. or after the previous question
shall have been ordered on its passage, for the president to entertain
and submit a motion to commit, with or without instructions, to a
standing or select committee. (Senate journal, 1912, p. 75.)
House.
Information not available.
A R K A N SA S.
Senate.
19. The previous question shall not be moved by less than three
members, and shall he stated in these words, to w it : “ Shall the main
81722— 14548
11
,1
30
question be now p u t ? " I f the previous qnestion is lost, the main qncstion shall not thereby be postponed, but the senate shall proceed with
the consideration of the same. If the previous question is carried, the
original mover of the main question, or. if the bill or resolution origi
nated in the other house, then the chairman of the committee reporting
the same shall have the right to close the debate and be limited to 30
m inutes; and should the previous question be ordered on a subject de
batable, before the same has been debated, the friends and the oppo
nents of the measure shall have 30 minutes on either side in which to
debate the question if desired. (Senate journal, 1001, p. 33.)
H ou se.
53.
When any debatable question is before the house any member
may move the previous question, but it shall be seconded by at least five
members whether that question (called the main question) shall now be
put.
If it passes in the affirmative, then the main question is to lie
put immediately, and no member shall debate it further, either to add to
or a lte r : Provided further, W hen, the previous question shall have
been adopted the mover of the main question or chairman of the com
mittee shall have the privilege of c!o=ing the debate and be limited to
one-half hour: Provided further, When the previous question has
been ordered on a debatable proposition which has not been debated ll>
minutes in tbe aggregate .-.-hall lie allowed the friends and opponents of
the proposition each before nutting the main question. (House journal,
1913, p. 28.)
C A L IF O R N IA .
Senate.
57. The previous qnestion shall bo put in the following form : “ Shall
the question be now p u t ? ”
It shall only be admitted when demanded
by a majority of the senators present upon a division : and its effect
shall be to put an end to all debate, except that the author of the bill
or the amendment shall have the right to close, and the subject under
discussion snail thereupon lie immediately put to a vote. On a motion
for. the previous question prior to a vote being taken by the senate, a
call of tLe senate shall be in order.
(List of members and rules, 1913,
p. 59.)
Assem bly.
45. The previous question shall lie in this form : “ Shall the main
question lie now p u t ? ”
And its effect, when sustained by a majority
of the members present, shall be to put an end to all debate and bring
the House to a vote on the question or questions before it.
(List of
members and rules, 1913, p. 119.)
COLORADO.
Senate.
X , 2. Debate may be closed at any time not less than one hour from
the adoption of a motion to that effect, and upon a three-fifths vote of
the members elect an hour may be fixed for a vote upon the pending
measure. On either of these motions not more than 10 minutes shall
be allowed for debate, and no senator shall speak more than 3 m inutes;
and no other motion shall lie entertained until the motion to close de
bate or to fix an hour for the vote on the pending question shall have
been determined.
(Senate Journal, 1907, p. 101.)
II ouse.
X X V I . 1. When there shall be a motion for the previous question,
which, being ordered by a majority of members present, if a quorum,
It shall have the effect to cut off all debate and bring the house to a
direct vote upon the immediate question or questions on which it has
been asked or ordered. The previous question may be asked and ordered
upon a single motion, a series of motions, allowable under the rules, or
an amendment or amendments, or may lie made to embrace all author
ized motions and amendments, and a motion to lay upon the table shall
be in order on the second or third reading of the bill.
2. A call of' the house shall not be in order after the previous ques
tion is ordered unless it shall appear upon tbe actual count by the
speaker that a quorum is not present.
3. All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made
for tlie previous question, and pending such motion, shall be decided,
whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate.
(House Journal, 1907,
p . 215.)
-
81722— 14548.
31
CON N ECTICU T.
Senate.
In the senate of 1011 the previous question was called for. and tho
point was raised that the previous question does not prevail in the
senate; the president pro tempore (I'eck) ruled the point well taken.
(S . J.. 1911, p. 5 5 5 ; register and manual, 1914, p. 133.)
House.
33. When a question is under debate no motion shall be received
except—
1. To adjourn.
2. To lay on the table.
3. For the previous question.
4. To postpone indefinitely.
5. To c ose the debate at a specified time.
0. To postpone to a time certain.
7. To commit or recommit.
8. To amend.
9. To continue to the next general assembly.
Which several motions shall have precedence in the order in which
they stand arranged in this rule, and no motion to lay on the table,
commit, or recommit, to continue to next general assembly, or to post
pone indefinitely, having keen cnce decided, shall lie again allowed
at the same sitting and at the same stage of the bill or subject
matter.
(Register and manual. 1914, p. 113.)
D ELAW ARE.
Senate.
5. All motions shall he subject to debate, except motions to adjourn,
to lay on the table, and for the previous question.
25. When a question is under debate no motion shall be received but
to adjourn, to lay on the table, for the previous question, to postpone
to a certain day. to commit, to amend, and to postpone indefinitely,
which several motions shall have precedence in the order in whicli
they are arranged.
(Senate rules, 1915, pp. 30, 34.)
House.
So.
A motion for the previous question shall not he entertained, ex
cept at the request of five members rising for that purpose, and shall
be determined without debate: but when ihe previous question lias
been called and sustained it shall not cut oflf any pending amendment.
The vote shall be taken, without debate, first on the amendments in
their order and then on the main question. (House rules, 1915, pp.
4 3 -4 4 .)
FLO RID A,
Senate.
No rule.
House.
12. lie shall put tho previous question in the following form ; “ Shall
the main question be now put?” And all debate on the main question
and pending amendments snail be suspended, except that the introducer
of a bill, resolution, or motion shall, if he so desire, he allowed five
minutes to discuss the same, or he may divide his time with or may
waive his right in favor of some other one member before the previous
question is crdeicd.
After the adoption of the previous question the
sense of the house of representatives shall forthwith he taken on
pending amendments in their regular order and then put upon the
main question.
13. On the previous question there shall be no debate.
(House
journal, 1911, p. 259.)
GEORGIA.
S e n a te.
50. The motion for the previous question shall be decided without
debate and shall take precedence of all other motions except mot'ons
“ to adjourn ” or “ to lav on the table," and when it is moved, the first
question shall he, “ Shall the call for the previous question he sus
ta in e d ?”
If this be decided by a majority vote in the affirmative, the
motion “ to adjourn ” or “ to lay on the table ” can still lie made, hut
they must he mode before the next question, to wit, " Shall the main
question he now p u t ? ’ is decided in the affirmative; and after said last
question is affirmatively decided by a majority vote said motions will
be out of order, and the Senate can not adjourn until the previous
question is exhausted or the regular hour of adjournment arrives.
51. When the previous question has been ordered, the Senate shall
then proceed to net on the main question without debate, except that
81722— 14548
i I
H
before the main question is put 20 minutes shall be allowed to the
committee whose report of the bill or other measure is under considera
tion to close debate. When the report of the committee is adverse to
the passage of the bill or other measure, the introducer of the bill shall
be allowed 20 minutes before the time allowed to the committee for
closing the debate. The chairman of the committee, or the introducer
of the bill or other measure, may yield the floor to such senators as
he may indicate for the time, or any nart of it, allowed under this rule.
52.
Alter the main question is ordered any senator may call for a
division of the s»nate in taking the vote, or may call for the yeas and
n a y s: but on all questions on which the yeas and nays are called the
assent of one-fifth of the number present shall be necessary to sustain
the call, and when such call is sustained, the yeas and nays shall be
entered on the journal.
515. The effect of the order that the * main question be now put ” is
•
to bring the senate to a vote on pending questions in the order in which
they stood before it was moved.
54. After the main question has been ordered no motion to reconsider
shall he in order until after the vote on the main question is taken and
announced.
55. In all cases of centosted election, where there is a majority and a
minority report from the committee on privileges and elections', if the
previous question is ordered, there shall ho 20 minutes allowed to the
member of said committee whose name is first signed to said minority
report, or to such member or members as he may indicate, for the
time so al'owed. or an? part of it. before the 20 minutes allowed to
the chairman submitting the majority report.
56. The previous question may be called and ordered upon a single
mot on or an amendment, or it may be made to embrace all authorized
motions or amendments and include the entire bill to its passage or
rejection.
57. A call of the senate shall not be in order after the previous
question is ordered, unless it shall appear upon an actual count by the
president that a quorum is not present.
58. All incidental questions of order a r i s i n g after a motion is made
for the previous question, and pending such motion, shall be d-eidod
whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate.
(Legislative Manual'
1D00-1901, pp. 3 0 -3 2 .)
H ou se.
04. The motion for the previous question shall be decided without
debate, and shall take precedence of all other motions except motirns
“ to adjourn ” or “ to lay on the table,” and when it is moved the
question shall he. '* Shall the motion for the previous question be sus
ta in e d ?” If this he decided by a majority vote in the affirmative, the
motion “ to adiourn ” or " t o lay on the ta b le ” can still be made, but
they must he made before the next question, to wit. “ Shall the main
question be now put.” is decided in the affirmative, and after said last
question is affirmatively decided, .by a majority vote, said motion will
be out of order, and t he House can not adjourn until the previous ques
tion is exhausted or the regular hour of adjournment arrives.
05. When the previous question has been ordered the House shall
proceed to act on the main question without debate, except that before
the main question is put 20 minutes shall be allowed to the committee
whose report of the bill or other measure is under consideration to
close the debate. Where the report of the committee is adverse to the
passage of the hill or other measure the introducer of the bill shall
be allowed 20 minutes before the time allowed to the committee for
closing the debate. The chairman of the committee or the introducer
of the bill nr other measure may yield the door to such Members as he
may indicate for the time, or any part of it allowed under this rule.
This rule shall not be construed to allow the 20 minutes above referred
to to he used but once on any bill or measure, and then on the final
passage rf the bill or measure.
06. A fter the main question is ordered, any Member may call for
n division of the House in taking the vote, or may call for the yeas
and n a ys: if the call for the yeas and nays is sustained by one-fifth
of the Members voting, the vote shall be taken by the yeas and nays
and so entered on the Journal.
07. The effect of the order that the “ main question be now p u t." is
to bring the House to a vote on pending questions in the order in which
they stood before it was moved.
08. After the main queslion ltas been ordered, no motion to reconsider
shall be in order until after the vote on the main question is taken
and announced.
6!). In all cases where a minority report has been submitted on any
question, if the previoas question is ordered, there shall be 20 minutes
81722—14548
i 1
33
allowed to the Member whose name is first signed to said minority
report, or to such Member or Members as he may indicate, for the time
so allowed, or any part of it, before the 20 minutes allowed to the
chairman submitting the majority report.
70. The previous question may be called and ordered upon a single
motion or an amendment, or it may be made to embrace all authorized
motions or amendments and include the entire bill to its passage or
rejection,
71. A call of the House shall not be in order after the previous
question is ordered, unless it shall appear upon an actual count by
the Speaker that a quorum is not present.
72. All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made
for the previous question, and pending such motion, shall be decided,
whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate.
(Legislative Manual
1 9 0 0 -19 0 1 , pp. 106 108.)
IDAHO.
Senate.
IV, 2. When a question is under debate the president shall receive
no motion but—
To adjourn.
To take a recess.
To proceed to the consideration of the special order.
To lay on the table.
The previous question.
To close debate at a special time.
T o postpone to a certain day.
To commit.
To amend or postpone indefinitely.
And they shall take precedence in the order named.
(Rules, 1915,
pp. 2 1 -2 2 .)
House.
14. Lpon the previous question being ordered by a majority of the
members present, if a quorum, the effect shall be to cut off debate and
bring the house to a direct vote upon the pending question. It shall
be in order, pending the motion for or after the previous question shall
have been ordered, for the speaker to entertain and submit a motion
to commit, with or without instructions, to a standing or select com
mittee. which motion shall be decided without debate.
15. When the previous question is decided in the negative, it shall
leave the main question under debate for the residue of the sitting,
unless sooner disposed of.
10.
All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made
for the previous question, during the pending of such motion or after
the house shall have determined that the main question shall be put,
shall be decided, whether an appeal or otherwise, without debate.
(Rules, 1915, pp. 3 -4 .)
IL L IN O IS .
Senate.
02. The previous question shall be stated in this form : “ Shall the
main question be now p u t ? ” and, until it is decided, shall preclude all
amendments or debate. When it is decided that the main question
shall now be put, the main question shall be considered as still remain
ing under debate.
03. The effect of the main question being ordered shall be to put an
end to all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote, first upon all
amendments reported or pending, in the inverse order in which they are
offered. After the motion for the previous question has prevailed, it
shall not be in order to move for a call of the senate unless it shall
appear by the yeas and nays as taken on the main question that no
quorum is present, or to move to adjourn, prior to a decision on the
main question.
(Senate journal, 1911, p. 13.)
H ou se.
CO. The previous question shall be put in this form : “ Shall the
main question be now p u t ? ” and until it is decided shall preclude all
amendments or debate. When it is decided that the main question
shall not now be put, the main question shall be considered as still
remaining under debate.
The effect of the main question being ordered shall be to put an
end to all debate and bring the house to a direct vote, first, upon all
amendments reported or pending in the inverse order in which they
arc offered. After the motion for the previous question has prevailed it
shall not be in order to move for a call of the house unless it shall
81722—14548----- 3
appear by yeas and nays, as taken on the main question, that no
quorum is present, or to move to adjourn prior to a decision of the
main question: Provided. If a motion to postpone is pending the only
effect of the previous question shall be to bring the House to a voto
upon such motion. (House Journal, 1913, p. 318.)
IN D IA N A .
Senate
18.
The previous question shall be put in this form : “ Shall the main
question be now p u t ? ” Until it is decided it shall preclude all debate
and the introduction of all further amendments. The previous question
having been ordered, the main question shall be the first question in
order, and its effect shall be to put an end to all debate and bring
the senate to a direct vote on the subsidiary questions then pending in
their order, and then on the main question.
When operating under
the previous question there shall be no debate or explanation of votes.
(Legislative Manual for 1913, p. 07.)
House.
GO. The previous question shall be put in this fo r m : “ Shall the
main question be now p u t ? ”
It shall only be admitted when de
manded by a majority of the members present, and its effect shall be
to put an' end to all debate and bring the house to a direct vote upon
a motion to commit if such motion shall have been made, and if this
motion does not prevail, then upon amendments reported by a com
mittee, if any, then upon pending amendments, and then upon the
main question. But its only effect, if a motion to postpone is pending,
shall be to bring the house to a vote upon such motion.
On the
previous question there shall be no debate. All incidental questions of
order arising after a motion is made for the previous question, and,
pending such motion, shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise,
without debate.
And after a demand for the previous question has
been seconded by the house no motion shall be entertained to excuse
a member from voting.
The ordering of the previous question shall
not prevent a member from explaining his vote, but no member under
this rule shall be permitted more than one minute for that purpose.
(Legislative Manual for 1913, p. 82.)
IO W A.
Senate.
11. A motion to adjourn, to lay on the table, and for the previous
question shall be decided without debate, and all incidental questions
of order arising after a motion is made for the previous question, and
pending such motion, shall be decided— whether an appeal or other
wise— without debate.
12. The previous question shall be in this form : “ Shall the main
question be now p u t ? ” It shall only be admitted when demanded by a
majority of the members present, and its effect shall be to put an end
to all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote upon pending amend
ments and then upon the main question, unless otherwise indicated by
the motion and ordered by the senate, except that the member in charge
aerc
of the measure under consideration shall have 10 minutes in which to
close the discussion immediately before the vote is taken upon the main
question.
If the previous question is decided in the negative, the
senate shall proceed with the matter before it the same as though the
previous question had not been moved.
(Official Register. 1 9 1 1 -1 2 ,
p. 179.)
House.
2G. The previous question shall always be put in this form : “ Shall
the main question be now p u t ? "
It shall only be admitted when de
manded by a majority of the members present, and its effect shall bo
to put an end to all debate and to bring the house to a direct vote upon
amendments and then upon the main question, unless otherwise indi
cated by the motion and ordered by the house, except that the member
In charge of the measure under consideration shall have 10 minutes in
which to close the discussion before the vote is taken. On a motion for
the previous question, and prior to seconding the same, a call of the
house shall be in order; but after such motion shall have been adopted
no call shall he in order prior to the decision of the main question. If
the previous question is decided in the negative, the house shall proceed
with the matter before it the same as though the previous question had
not been moved.
27. Motions to lay on the table, to adjourn, and for the previous
question shall he decided without debate.
(Official Register, 1 9 1 1 -1 2 ,
p . 185.)
81722— 14548
■
KAN SA S.
Senate.
15. Any five senators shall t>ave the right to demand tlie previous
question. The previous question shall be as follo w s: “ Shall the
main question be now p u t ? ” and until it is decided shall preclude all
amendments or debate.
When on taking the previous question tho
senate shall decide that the main question shall not be put. the main
question shall be considered as still remaining under debate. The main
question shall be on the passage of the b 11, resolution, or other matter
under consideration; but when amendments are pending the'question
shall first be taken upon such amendments in their order: and when
amendments have been adopted in committee of the whole and not
acted on in the senate, the questicn shall be taken upon such amend
ments in like order, and without further debate or amendment.
Hut
the previous question can be moved on a pending amendment, and, if
adopted, debate is closed on the amendment only : and after the amend
ment is voted on the main question shall again be open to debate and
amendments. In this case the question shall be. “ Shall the vote now
be taken on the pending am endm ent?”
(Senate rules, 1913, 1st cd.,
p. 5.)
H ou se.
51. The “ previous question ” shall he as fo llo w s: “ Shall tho main
question he now p u t ? ” and until it is decided shall preclude all amend
ment or debate.
When, on taking the previous question, the house
shall decide that the main question shall not now be put, the main
question shall be considered as still remaining under debate. The main
question shall be on the passage of the bill, resolution, or other matter
under consideration ; hut when amendments are ponding, the question
shall first be taken upon such amendments in their order ; and when
amendments have been adopted hv the committee of the whole and not
acted on in the house, the question shall be taken upon such amend
ments in like order, and without further debate or amendment. (House
Rules, 1913, p. 1G.)
K E N TU C KY.
Senate.
55. When the “ previous question ” has been moved, seconded, and
adopted a vote shall he immediately taken upon the pending measure
and such pending amendments as are in order.
The elfoct of the "p reviou s question” shall therefore he to put an
end to all debate; to prevent the offering of additional amendments, and
to bring the senate to an immediate vote upon the measure as afore
said.
The previous question may he ordered by a majority of the senators
voting on that question. On the call of the roll no senator shall be
allowed to speak more than three minutes to explain his vote and shall
not speak at ah if the question is not a debatable question. After the
previous question has been ordered a senator, whose bill or amendment
o r motion— if debatable— is pending, may speak not exceeding 10 min
utes thereon, and one senator of the opposition may speak not exceeding
10 minutes.
(Directory, 191-1, p. 214.)
H o u se.
24. Tho previous quest Ion being moved and seconded, the question from
the Chair shall be, - Shall the main question he now p u t ? ” And if
the nays prevail, tho main question shall not then he put. The effect
of the previous question shall be to put an end to all debate except on
tho final passage of the measure under consideration : then the op
ponents of the measure shall have 10 minutes to debate the proposi
tion and the proposer of the measure shall be limited to 10 minutes to
close the debate, unless his time be extended by consent of the house,
and bring the house to a direct vote on amendments proposed by a
committee, if a n y ; then on pending amendments and all amendments
which have been read for information of the house by the clerk shall ho
regarded as pending amendments; and then upon the main question
(Directory, 1914, p. 253 )
L O U ISIA N A .
Information not available.
M A IN E .
Senate.
No rule.
House.
31. W'hen motion for the previous question is made the consent of
one-third of tho members present shall he necessary to .authorize the
speaker to entertain it.
No debate shall he allowed until tho matter
81722— 14543
of consent Is determined. The previous question shall be submitted in
the following w ords: “ Shall the main question be put n o w ?"
No
member shall speak more than live minutes on the motion for the pre
vious question, and while that question is pending a motion to lay on
the table shall not he decided without debate. A call for the yeas and
nays or for division of a question shall lie in order after the main
Question has been ordered to lie put.
After the adoption of the pre
vious question the vote shall he taken forthwith upon amendments, and
then upon the main question.
(Maine Register, 1 9 1 4 -1 5 , pp. 1 8 6 -1 8 7 .)
MAUYLAND.
Senate.
No rule.
House.
19.
There shall he a motion for the previous question, which, being
ordered hy a majority of the members present, shall preclude all fur
ther debate and bring the house to a direct vote upon the immediate
question or questions on which it has been asked and ordered. It may
be asked and ordered upon any debatable motion or a series of motions
to and embracing the main question, if desired.
(Maryland Manual,
1912, p. 287.)
M A SSACH U SETTS.
Senate.
47. Debate may be closed at any time not less than one hour from
the adoption of a motion to that effect. On this motion not more than
10 minutes shall lie allowed for debate, and no member shall speak
more than 3 minutes.
(Manual for the General Court, 1913, p. 533.)
House.
81. The previous question shall be put in the following form : “ Shall
the main question be now p u t7“ and all debate upon the main question
shall be suspended until the previous question is decided.
82. On the previous question debate shall be allowed only to give
reasons why the main question should not be put.
83. All questions of order arising after a motion is made for the
previous question shall be decided without debate, excepting on appeal;
and on such appeal nc member shall speak more than once, without
leave of the bouse.
84. The adoption of the previous question shall put an end to all
debate, except as provided in rule 8G, and bring the house to a direct
vote upon pending amendments, if any, in their regular order, and then
upon the main question.
85. Debate may be closed at any time not less than 30 minutes from
the adoption of a motion to that effect. In case the time is extended
by unanimous consent, the same rule shall apply at the end of the
extended time as at the time originally fixed.
86. When debate is closed by ordering the previous question or by
a vote to close debate at a specified time, the member in charge of the
measure under consideration shall be allowed to speak 10 minutes and
may grant to any other member any portion of his time.
When the
measure under consideration has been referred to the committee on
ways and means, under house rule 44, the member originally reporting
it shall be considered, in charge, except where the report of the com
mittee on ways and means is substantially different from that referred
to them, in which case the member originally reporting the measure
and the member of the committee on ways and means reporting thereon
shall each be allowed to speak five minutes, the latter to have the
Close. When the member cnlitled to speak under this rule is absent,
the member standing first in order upon the committee reporting the
measure who is present and joined in the report shall have the right
to occupy such time.
(Manual for the General Court, 1„13, pp. 5 6 6 568.)
M ICH IG AN '.
Senate.
41. The mode of ordering the previous question shall be as fo llo w s:
Any senator mav move the previous question. This being seconded by at
least one other Senator, the chair shall submit the question in this form,
“ Shall the main question now be p u t ? ”
T M s shall be ordered only by
a maioritv of the senators present and voting. The effect of ordering
the previous question shall be to Instantly close debate and bring the
senate to an Immediate vote on the pending question or questions in
their regular order.
The motion for the previous question may be
limited by the mover to one or more of the questions preceding the
main question itself, in which case the form shall be, " Shall the ques
tion, as lim ifed.be now p a t ? ” The yeas and nays may be demanded on
81722— 14548
37
a n y v o t e u n d e r t h i s r u le , a n d a m o t io n f o r a c a ll o f t h e s e n a t e s h a ll
b e in o r d e r a t a n y t im e p r io r to t h e o r d e r in g o f th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n .
A n y q u e s t io n o f o r d e r o r a p p e a l f r o m th e d e c is io n or th e c h a ir , p o n d
in g th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , s h a ll he d e c id e d w i t h o u t d e b a t e .
W h e n th e
q u e s lio n is o n m o t io n to r e c o n s id e r , u n d e r t h e o p e r a t io n o f th e p r e
v io u s q u e s t io n a n d it is d e c id e d in t h e a f f ir m a t iv e , t h e p r e v io u s q u e s
t io n s h a ll h a v e n o o p e r a t io n u p o n th e q u e s t io n t o be r e c o n s id e r e d .
If
th e s e n a t e r e f u s e s to o r d e r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , t h e c o n s id e r a t io n
o f th e s u b je c t s h a ll he r e s u m e d , a s if no m o t io n t h e r e fo r h a d b ee n m a d e .
( M ic h ig a n M a n u a l, 1 9 1 3 , p. 5 8 0 . )
House.
5 1 . T h e m e t h o d o f o r d e r in g t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll b e a s f o l l o w s :
A n y m e m b e r m a y m o v e th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n .
T h i s b e in g s e c o n d e d by
a t le a s t 1 0 m e m b e r s , t h e c h a ir s h a ll p u t t h e q u e s t io n , “ S h a ll t h e m a in
q u e s t io n n o w be n u t ? ”
T h i s s h a ll b e o r d e r e d o n ly b y a m a jo r i t y o f
t h e m e m b e r s p r e s e n t a n d v o t in g .
A f t e r t h e s e c o n d in g o f t h e p r e v io u s
q u e s t io n , a n d p r io r t o o r d e r in g t h e s a m e , a c a ll o f t h e h o u s e m a y be
m o v e d a n d o r d e r e d , b u t a f t e r o r d e r in g t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n n o th in g
s h a ll he In o r d e r p r io r to t h e d e c is io n o f t h e p e n d in g q u e s t io n s , e x c e p t
d e m a n d s f o r y e a s a n d n a y s , p o in t s o f o r d e r , a n d a p p e i l s fr o m th e d e
c is io n o f th e c h a ir , w h ic h s h a ll b e d e c id e d w it h o u t d e b a te .
T h e e ffe c t
o f th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll be t o p u t a n en d to a ll d e b a t e a n d b r in g
th e h o u s e t o a d ir e c t v o t e u p o n a ll p e n d in g o u e s t io n s in t h e ir o r d e r
d o w n to a n d i n c lu d in g t h e m a in q u e s t io n .
W h e n a m o t io n to r e c o n
s id e r is ta k e n u n d e r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , a n d is d e c id e d in th e a ffir m a
t iv e , t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll h a v e n o o p e r a t io n u p o n th e q u e s t io n t o
b e r e c o n s id e r e d .
I f t h e h o u se s h a ll r e fu s e t o o r d e r t h e m a in q u e s t io n ,
t h e c o n s id e r a t io n o f t h e s u b je c t s h a ll b e r e s u m e d , a s th o u g h n o m o t io n
f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n h a d b ee n m a d e .
( M ic h i g a n M a n u a l, 1 9 1 3 , p.
5 9 4 -5 9 5 .)
MINNESOTA.
Senate.
2 5 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll b e in t h i s f o r m : “ S h a ll t h e m a in
q u e s tio n be n o w p u t ? ”
I t s h a ll o n ly be a d m it t e d w h e n d e m a n d e d b y
a m a j o r i t y o f th e m e m b e r s p r e s e n t , a n d it s e ffe c t s h a ll b e to p u t a n en d
t o a il d e b a t e , a n d b r in g th e S e n a t e ( o a d ir e c t v o t e u p o n a m e n d m e n t s
r e p o r te d b y a c o m m it t e e , i f a n y , th e n u p o n a ll p e n d in g a m e n d m e n t s in
t h e ir o r d e r , a n d th e n u p o n th e m a in q u e s t io n .
O n a m o tio n f o r th e
p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , a n d p r io r t o t h e o r d e r in g o f t h e s a m e , a c a ll o f
th e s e n a t e s h a ll be in o r d e r , b u t a f t e r a m a jo r i t y s h a ll h a v e o r d e r e d su c h
m o t io n , n o c a ll s h a ll h e in o r d e r p r io r to t h e d e c is io n o f t h e m a in
q u e s t io n .
20.
O n a p r e v io u s q u e s t io n th e r e s h a ll b e n o d e b a t e .
A l l in c id e n t a l
q u e s t io n s o f o r d e r a r i s i n g a f t e r a m o tio n is m a d e f o r th e p r e v io u s q u e s
t io n , a n d p e n d in g su c h m o t io n , s h a ll he d e c id e d , w h e t h e r on a n n e a l o r
o t h e r w is e , w i t h o u t d e b a te .
( L e g i s l a t i v e M a n u a l, M i n n e s o t a , 1 9 1 3 , p.
1 5 G .)
House.
3 9 . ( a ) T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll b e in t h is f o r m : “ T h e g e n t le m a n
D o 1 0 m e m b e r s se c o n d th e
f r o m -------------- m o v e s th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n .
m o tio n ?”
I f th e m o tio n b e p r o p e r ly se c o n d e d , th e q u e s t io n s h a ll ho
s t a t e d , a s f o l l o w s : “ A s m a n y a s a r e in f a v o r o f o r d e r in g t h e p r e v io u s
q u e s t io n w ill s a y ‘ A y e ’ : a s m a n v a s a r e o p p o s e d w il s a y ‘ N o .’ ’
T h e r e s h a ll he a m o t io n f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n w h ic h , b e in g o r
d e re d b y a m a j o r i t y o f a ll m e m b e r s p r e s e n t , s h a ll h a v e th e e ffe c t to c u t
o ff a ll d e b a t e a n d b r in g th e b o u s e to a d ir e c t v o t e u p o n th e im m e d ia t e
q u e s t io n o r q u e s t io n s u p o n w h ic h it h a s b ee n a s k e d o r o r d e r e d .
T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n m a y he a s k e d a n d o r d e r e d u p o n a s in g le m o
t io n , a s e r ie s o f m o t io n s a l l o w a b ’ e u n d e r th e r u le s , o r a n a m e n d m e n t o r
a m e n d m e n t s ; o r it m a y ho m a d e to e m b r a c e a ll a u th o r iz e d m o t io n s o r
a m e n d m e n t s a n d in c lu d e th e b ill to it s p a s s a g e o r r e je c t io n .
( b ) A c a ll o f t h e b o u s e s h a ll nr,t be in o r d e r a f t e r th e p r e v io u s q u e s
t io n is o r d e r e d u n le s s it s h a ll a p p e a r t h a t a q u o r u m i s n o t p r e s e n t .
( c ) W h e n ( h e p r e v io u s q u e s tio n is d e c id e d in th e n e g a t iv e , it shaTl
le a v e th e m a in q u e s t io n u n d e r d e b a t e f o r th e r e s id u e o f th e s i t t i n g
u n le s s s o o n e r d is p o s e d o f b y t a k in g a v o t e o n th e q u e s t io n o r In s o m e
o th e r m a n n er.
( L e g i s l a t i v e M a n u a l, M i n n e s o t a , 1 9 1 3 ,- p . 1 6 9 . )
MISSISSIPPI.
In fo r m a tio n
n o t a v a ila b le .
MISSOUEI.
Senate.
4 7 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll be in t h i s f o r m : “ S h a ll t h e m a in
q u e s t io n b e n o w p u t ? ”
I t s h a ll o n ly be a d m it t e d o n d e m a n d o f two
s e n a t o r s a n d s u s t a i n e d b y a v o t e o f a m a j o r i t y o f th e s e n a t o r s p r e s e n t ,
81722— 14548
a n d it s e ffe c t s h a ll p u t nn c u d t o a ll d e b a t e a n d b r in g t h e s e n a t e t o a
d ir e c t v o t e u p o n a m o t io n to c o m m it i f s u c h m o t io n s h a ll h a v e b ee n
m a d e : a n d i f t h is m o tio n d e e s n o t p r e v a il, th e n u p o n a m e n d m e n t s r e
p o r te d b y a e o m m it t e e , i f a n y , th e n u p o n p e n d in g a m e n d m e n t s , a n d th e n
u p o n th e m a in q u e s t io n .
O n d e m a n d o f th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , a c a ll o f
th e s e n a t e s h a ll be in o r d e r , b u t a f t e r a m a j o r i t y h a v e s u s t a in e d su c h a
m o t io n n o c a ll s h a ll be in o r d e r p r io r t o t h e d e c is io n o n th e m a in
q u e s t io n .
4 8 . O n m o t io n f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n n o d e b a t e s h a ll b e a llo w e d ,
a n d a ll in c id e n t a l q u e s t io n s o f o r d e r a r i s i n g a f t e r t h e m o t io n is m a d e f o r
t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , a n d . p e n d in g su c h m o t io n , s h a ll b e d e c id e d , on
a p p e a l o r o t h e r w is e , w i t h o u t d e b a t e ,
i f , o n a v o t e f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s
t io n , a m a j o r i t y o f th e s e n a t o r s v o t e in th e n e g a t iv e , t h e n t h e f u r t h e r
c o n s id e r a t io n o f t h e s u b je c t m a t t e r s h a ll he in o r d e r .
( S e n a t e J o u r n a l,
1 0 1 1 , p. 3 7 .)
H o u se.
5 7 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll lie in t h is f o r m : “ S h a ll t h e q u e s t io n
n o w u n d e r im m e d ia t e c o n s id e r a t io n he n o w p u t ? ”
I t m a y he m o v e d
a n d se c o n d e d lik e a n y o t h e r q u e s t io n , b u t i t s h a ll o n ly p r e v a il w h e n
su p n o r t e d b y a m a j o r i t y o f t h e m e m b e r s p r e s e n t , a n d . u n t il d e c id e d ,
s h a ll p r e c lu d e a m e n d m e n t a n d d e b a t e : a n d a f a i lu r e to s u s t a in th e s a m e
s h a ll n o t p u t t h e m a t t e r u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n f r o m b e fo r e t h e h o u s e , h u t
th e h o u s e s h a ll p ro c e e d a s i f s a id m o t io n h a d n o t b e e n m a d e .
(H o u s e
J o u r n a l, 1 0 1 1 , p . 2 1 . )
M O N TANA,
S en a te.
30. The
p r e v io n s
q u e s t io n s ’ 'n l l he in t h i s f o r m : “ S h a l l t h e m a in
s h a ll o n ly h e a d m i t t e d w h e n d e m a n d e d b y
p r e s e n t , u p o n d iv is io n , a n d i t s e ffe c t s h a ll
he t o p u t a n e n d to a ll d e b a t e a n d liv in g t h e s e n a t e t o a d ir e c t v o t e
u p o n a m e n d m e n t s r e p o r te d hv a c o m m it t e e , i f a n y , u p o n p e n d in g a m e n d
m e n t s , a n d th e n u p o n t h e m a in q u e s t io n .
O n a m o t io n f o r th e p r e v io u s
q u e s t io n , a r d p r io r to t ’ c s e c o n d in g o f t h e s a m e , a c a ll o f t h e s e n a t e
q iial] he in o r d e r , b u t a f t e r a m a j o r i t y o f t h e s e n a t o r s l a v e se c o n d e d
su c h m o tio n n o c a ll s h a ll he in o r d e r p r io r t o t h e d e c is io n o f t h e m a in
q u e s t io n .
I f t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n is n e g a t iv e d , th e s e n a t e s h a ll p r o
ceed in t h e s a m e m a n n e r a s i f t ’ e m o t io n h a d n o t been m a d e .
3 1 . O n a m o t io n f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n a n d u n d e r t h e p r e v io u s
q u e s t io n t h e r e s h a ll he n o d e b a t e : a n d a il in c id e n t a l q u e s t io n s o f o r d e r
a r i s i n g a f t e r a m o t io n is m a d e f o r H e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n ( o r w h i le a c t
in g u n d e r ti e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n ) s h a ll lie d e c id e d , w h e t h e r o n a p p e a l o r
o t h e r w is e , w i t h o u t d e b a t e .
( L e g i s l a t i v e M a n u a l, 1 8 9 5 , p p . 2 3 - 2 - 1 .)
question i)C n o w p u t .”
It
n m ajority o f t h e s e n a t o r s
House.
X X T I T . 1 . T h e r e s h a ll ho a m o t io n f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , w h ic h ,
b e in g o r d e r e d b y a m a j o r i t y , i f a q u o r u m he p r e s e n t , s h a ll h a v e t h e
e ffe c t to c u t o ff a ll d e b a t e a n d liv in g t h e h o u s e to a d ir e c t v o t e u p o n
t h e i m m e d ia t e q u e s t io n o r q u e s t io n s on w h ic h i t h a s b ee n a s k e d o r
o r d e r e d : P ro vid ed . T h a t w h e n t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n is o r d e r e d on a n y
p r o p o s it io n o n w h ic h th e r e h a s been r o d e b a t e it s h a ll he in o r d e r t o
d e b a t e t h e p r o p o s it io n t o he v o te d o n f o r 3 0 m i n u t e s , on e-1 n lf o f s u c h
t im e to ho g iv e n t o d e b a t e in f a v o r o f a n d o n e -h a l f in d e b a t e in o p p o
s it io n t o s u c h p r o p o s it io n
T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n m a y he a s k e d a n d
o r d e r e d u p o n a s i n g le m o t io n , a s e r ie s o f m o t io n s a l lo w a b le u n d e r t h e
r u le s , o r nn a m e n d m e n t o r a m e n d m e n t s , a n d in c lu d e t h e b ill t o it s p a s
s a g e o r r e je c t io n .
I t s h a ll he in o r d e r , p e n d in g t h e m o t io n f o r o r a f t e r
f i e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll h a v e b ee n o r d e r e d on i t s p a s s a g e , f o r th e
s p e a k e r to e n t e r t a in a n d s u b m it m o t io n t o c o m m it , w i t h o r w i t h o u t
in s t r u c t i o n s , t o a s t a n d in g o r s e le c t c o m m i t t e e : a n d a m o t io n to la y
u n o n t h e t a b le s h a ll b e in o r d e r on t h e s e c o n d a n d t h ir d r e a d in g o f a
b ill.
2 . A c a ll o f t h e h o u s e s h a ll n o t be in o r d e r a f t e r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s
t io n is o r d e r e d u n le s s it s h a ll a p p e a r u p o n a n a c t u a l c o u n t b y t h e
s p e a k e r t h a t a q u o r u m Is n o t p r e s e n t .
3 . A l l In c id e n t a l q u e s t io n s o f o r d e r a r i s i n g f r o m , a f t e r a m o t io n is
m a d e f o r t ' e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , a n d p e n d in g s u c h m o t io n s ’ a ll be d e
c id e d . w h e t h e r o n a p p e a l o r o t h e r w is e , w i t h o u t d e b a t e .
(L e g is la tiv e
M a n u a l, 1 8 9 5 , p p . 3 4 - 3 5 . )
N FrnnASKA.
Senate.
1G . W h e n a q u e s t io n Is u n d e r d e b a t e n o m o t io n c a n b e re c e iv e d b u t
(o a d je u r n , f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , to la y o n t h e t a b le , t o p o ^ tn o n e
in d e fin it e ly , t o p o s t p o n e t o a c e r t a in d a y . to c o m m it , o r a m e n d , w h ic h
s e v e r a l m o t io n s s h a ll h a v e p r e c e d e n c e in t h e o r d e r th e y s t a n d a r r a n g e d .
(L e g is la t iv e M a n u a l, 1 0 1 1 - 1 2 . p . 1 1 2 .)
81722— 14548
39
H o m e .
2G. T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll b e in t h is fo r m : “ S h a ll t h e d e b a te
now c lo s e ? ”
I t s h a ll b e a d m it t e d w h e n d e m a n d e d b y five o r m o r e
m e m b e r s a n d m u s t be s u s t a in e d by a m a j o r i t y v o t e , a n d u n t il d e c id e d
s h a ll p r e c lu d e f u r t h e r d e b a t e a n d a ll a m e n d m e n t s a n d m o t io n s e x c e p t
o n e m o t io n t o a d jo u r n a n d o n e m o tio n t o l a y on t h e t a b le .
2 7 . O n a p r e v io u s q u e s t io n th e r e s h a ll b e n o d e b a te .
A l l i n c id e n t a l
q u e s t io n s o f o r d e r a r i s i n g a f t e r a m o t io n is m a d e f o r th e p r e v io u s
q u e s tio n a n d p e n d in g su c h m o t io n s h a ll be d e c id e d , w h e t h e r on a p p e a l
o r o t h e r w is e , w i t h o u t d e b a t e .
( L e g i s l a t i v e M a n u a l, 1 9 1 1 - 1 2 , p. 1 5 3 . )
N EVA D A .
Senate.
1 8 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll n o t be p u t u n le s s d e m a n d e d b y th r e e
S e n a t o r s , a n d it s h a ll be in t h i s f o r m : “ S h a ll t h e m a in q u e s tio n be
now p u t ? ”
W h e n s u s t a in e d b y a m a j o r i t y o f s e n a t o r s p r e s e n t it s h a ll
p u t a n en d to a ll d e b a t e a n d b r in g th e s e n a t e to a v o t e on t h e q u e s tio n
o r q u e s t io n s b e fo r e it . a n d a ll i n c id e n t a l q u e s t io n s a r is in g a f t e r th e
m o tio n w a s m a d e s h a ll be d e c id e d w i t h o u t d e b a te .
( A p p e n d ix to J o u r
n a ls , 1 9 1 1 , v . 1 , p . 1 2 5 . )
Assembly.
3 3 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s tio n s h a ll he in t h i s fo r m : “ S h a ll th e m a in
q u e s t io n b e n o w p u t ? ” a n d i t s e f f e c t , w h e n s u s t a in e d b y a m a j o r i t y o f
th e m e m b e r s e le c te d , s h a ll be t o p u t a n e n d to a ll d e b a te a n d b r in g
t h e h o u se to a v o t e on th e q u e s t io n o r q u e s t io n s b e fo r e it.
3 4 . A l l in c id e n t a l q u e s t io n s a r i s i n g a f t e r a m o t io n i s m a d e f o r th e
p r e v io u s q u e s t io n a n d p e n d in g su c h m o tio n o r p r e v io u s q u e s tio n s h a ll
he d e c id e d , w h e t h e r on a p p e a l o r o t h e r w is e , w i t h o u t d e b a te .
3 5 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll o n ly be p u t w h e n d e m a n d e d by th r e e
m em bers.
( A p p e n d i x t o J o u r n a ls , 1 9 1 1 . v . 1 , p . 1 4 1 . )
NEW HAMPSHIRE.
Senate.
No
r u le .
House.
2 3 . T h e s p e a k e r s h a ll p u t t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n in t h e f o llo w in g
f o r m : “ S h a ll t h e m a in q u e s t io n n o w be p u t ? ” a n d a ll d e b a te u p on th e
m a in q u e s t io n s h a ll he s u s p e n d e d u n t il th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n h a s been
d e c id e d .
A f t e r th e a d o p t io n o f t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , t h e s e n s e o f
t h e h o u s e s h a ll f o r t h w i t h be ta k e n u p o n p e n d in g a m e n d m e n t s , in t h e ir
r e g u la r o r d e r , a n d t h e n u p o n th e m a in q u e s t io n .
T h e m o t io n f o r t h e
p r e v io u s q u e s tio n s h a ll not: be p u t u n le s s d e m a n d e d b y th r e e m e m b e r s .
2 4 . A l l in c id e n t a l q u e s t io n s o f o r d e r a r i s i n g a f t e r a m o t io n f o r th e
p r e v io u s q u e s t io n a n d r e la t e d t o t h e s u b je c t s a ffe c t e d b y t h e o r d e r o f
t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll be d e c id e d w i t h o u t d e b a te .
2 5 . I f t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n is d e c id e d in t h e n e g a t iv e , it s h a ll n o t
be a g a in in o r d e r u n til a f t e r a d jo u r n m e n t , b u t th e m a in q u e s tio n s h a ll
he l e f t b e fo r e t h e h o u s e a n d d is p o s e d o f a s t h o u g h th e p r e v io u s q u e s tio n
h a d n o t been p u t .
(M a n u a l fo r th e G e n e ra l C o u rt, 1 9 1 3 , pp. 4 0 7 - 4 0 8 .)
NEW JERSEY.
Senate.
No
r u le .
House.
3 3 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll be p u t in t h i s f o r m : “ S h a ll th e
m a in q u e s t io n be n o w p u t ? ”
I t s h a ll o n ly be a d m it t e d w h e n d e m a n d e d
b y a m a j o r i t y o f th e m e m b e r s p r e s e n t , a n d it s e ffe c t s h a ll b e, i f d e c id e d
a f f ir m a t iv e ly , to p u t a n en d to a ll d e b a t e , a n d b r in g th e h o u s e to a
d ir e c t v o t e u p o n a m e n d m e n t s r e p o r te d b y a c o m m it t e e , i f a n y , th e n
u p on p e n d in g a m e n d m e n t s , a n d th e n u p o n th e m a in q u e s t io n ; if d e c id e d
in t h e n e g a t iv e , t o le a v e t h e m a in q u e s t io n a n d a m e n d m e n t s , i f a n y ,
u n d e r d e b a te f o r t h e r e s id u e o f t h e s i t t i n g , t in le s s so o n e r d isp o se d o f
b y t a k i n g t h e q u e s t io n , o r in s o m e o t h e r m a n n e r .
A l l in c id e n t a l q u e s
t io n s o f o r d e r a r i s i n g a f t e r a m o t io n is m a d e f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s tio n ,
a n d p e n d in g su c h m o t i o n ,'s h a l l he d e c id e d , w h e t h e r on a p p e a l o r o t h e r
w is e , w i t h o u t d e b a te .
( L e g i s l a t i v e M a n u a l, 1 9 1 4 , p . 8 4 . )
NEW MEXICO.
I n f o r m a t i o n n o t a v a il a b l e , e x c e p t t h a t b e fo r e i n a u g u r a t io n o f s t a t e
h o o d p r e v io u s q u e s t io n in b o th h o u s e s w a s a llo w e d .
( C o u n c il R u le s,
1 9 0 7 , p . 8 ; H o u s e R u le s , 1 9 0 1 , pu 1 1 .)
NEW YORK.
Senate.
3 2 . W h e n a n y b i l l, r e s o lu t io n , o r m o t io n s h a ll h a v e b ee n u n d e r c o n
s id e r a t io n f o r s ix h o u r s it s h a ll be in o r d e r f o r a n y s e n a t o r to m o v e
8172 2— 1454S
to c lo s e d e b a te , a n d th e p r e s id e n t s h a ll r e c o g n iz e th e s e n a t o r w h o
w is h e s to m a k e su c h m o t io n .
S u c h m o t io n s h a ll n o t b e a m e n d a b le
o r d e b a t a b le a n d s h a ll be I m m e d ia t e ly p u t , a n d if i t s h a ll r e c e iv e th e
a ffir m a t iv e v o t e s o f a m a jo r i t y o f th e s e n a t o r s presenr. th e p e n d in g
m e a s u r e s h a ll ta k e p re c e d e n c e ove r a ll o t h e r b u s in e s s .
T h e v o t e s h a ll
t h e r e u p o n be ta k e n u p o n su c h b i ll, m o t io n , o r r e s o lu tio n , w ith su c h
a m e n d m e n t s a s m a y be p e n d in g a t th e t i m e o f s u c h m o tio n a c c o r d in g
t o th e r u le s o f th e s e n a t e , b u t w it h o u t f u r t h e r d e b a te , e x c e p t t h a t a n y
s e n a t o r w h o m a y d e s ir e so to d o s h a ll b e p e r m it t e d to sn e a k th e r e o n
n o t m o re t h a n o n c e a n d n o t e x c e e d in g o n e -h a l f h o u r .
A f t e r su c h m o
t io n to c lo s e d e b a te h a s b ee n m a d e by a n y s e n a t o r , n o o t h e r m o tio n
s h a ll be in o r d e r u n til su c h m o t io n h a s been v o te d u p o n b y th e s e n a t e .
A f t e r t h e s e n a t e s h a ll h a v e a d o p t e d th e m o tio n to c lo s e d e b a t e , a s h e r e
in b e fo r e p r o v id e d , n o m o t io n s h a ll b e in o r d e r b u t o n e m o tio n to a d
j o u r n a n d a m o t io n to c o m m it .
S h o u ld s a id m o tio n to a d io u r n b e c a r
r ie d , th e m e a s u r e u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n s h a ll b e th e p e n d in g q u e s tio n
w h e n th e s e n a t e s h a ll a g a in c o n v e n e a n d s h a ll be ta k e n up a t tu e tim
o f su c h a d jo u r n m e n t .
T h e m o tio n to c lo s e d e b a t e m a y he o r d e r e d u p o n
a s in g le m o t io n , a s e r ie s o f m o t io n s a llo w a b le u n d e r th e r u le s , o r a n
a m e n d m e n t o r a m e n d m e n t s , o r m a y be m a d e to e m b r a c e a ll a u th o r iz e d
m o t io n s o r a m e n d m e n t s a n d in c lu d e th e b i ll, r e s o lu tio n , o r m o tio n to i t s
p a s s a g e o r r e je c t io n .
A ll in c id e n t a l q u e s t io n s o f o r d e r , o r m o t io n s
p e n d in g a t t h e t im e su c h m o t io n is m a d e to c lo se d e b a t e , w h e t h e r th e
s a m e be on a p p e a l o r o t h e r w is e , s h a ll b e d e c id e d w it h o u t d e b a t e .
(R e d
B o o k , 1 9 1 4 , pp 6 2 7 - 6 2 3 . )
House.
2 9 . T h e “ p r e v io u s q u e s t io n ” s h a ll b e p u t a s f o l l o w s : “ S h a ll th e
m a in q u e s t io n n o w be p u t ? ” a n d u n til it is d e c id e d , s h a ll p r e c lu d e a ll
a m e n d m e n t s o r d e b a te .
W h e n on t a k i n g th e p r e v io u s q u a * ; m u • :c
h o u s e s h a ll d e c id e , t h a t th e m a in q u e s t io n s h a ll n o t n o w be p n t , th e
m a in q u e s t io n s h a ll be c o n s 'd e r e d n s s t i ll r e m a in in g u n d e r d e b a te .
The
“ m a in q u e s t i o n ” s h a ll be th e a d v a n c e m e n t c r p a s s a g e o f th e b i ll, r e s o
l u t io n , o r o th e r m a t t e r u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n ; b u t w h e n a m e n d m e n t s a re
p e n d in g , t h e q u e s tio n s h a ll fir st b e ta k e n u p o n s u c h a m e n d m e n t s in th e ir
ord er.
( R e d B o o k , 1 9 1 4 , p. 6 5 9 . )
NOBTH CAROLINA.
Scnalc.
2 4 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll be a s f o l l o w s : “ S h a ll t h e m a in
q u e s t io n be p u t ? ” a n d , u n t il i t is d e c id e d , s h a ll p r e c lu d e a ll a m e n d
m e n t s a n d d e b a te .
I f t h is q u e s t io n s h a ll be d e c id e d in th e a ffir m a t iv e ,
t h e “ m a in q u e s t io n ” s h a ll be on th e p a s s a g e o f th e b ill, r e s o lu t io n , o r
o t h e r m a t t e r u n d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n ; b u t w h e n a m e n d m e n t s a r e p e n d in g
t h e q u e s t io n s h a ll he ta k e n u p o n su c h a m e n d m e n t s , in t h e ir o r d e r ,
w it h o u t f u r t h e r d e b a t e o r a m e n d m e n t .
H o w ev er, an y sen a to r m ay
m o v e t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n a n d m a y r e s t r ic t th e s a m e t o a n a m e n d
m ent. o r o t h e r m a t t e r t h e n u n d e r d is c u s s io n .
I f s u c h q u e s t io n be
d e c id e d in th e n e g a t iv e , t h e m a in q u e s t io n s h a ll b e c o n s id e r e d a s re
m a in in g u n d e r d e b a t e .
2 5 . W h e n t h e m o t io n f o r th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n is m a d e , a n d p e n d in g
th e s e c o n d t h e r e t o b y a m a j o r i t y , d e b a t e s h a ll c e a s e , a n d O nly a m o tio n
t o a d jo u r n o r la y o n th e t a b le s h a ll be in o r d e r , w h ic h m o t io n s s h a ll be
p u t a s f o l l o w s : P r e v io u s q u e s t io n ; a d jo u r n ; la y o n t h e ta b le .
A fte r
a m o t io n f o r th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n is m a d e , p e n d in g a se c o n d t h e r e to ,
a n y m e m b e r m a y g iv e n o tic e t h a t lie d e s ir e s to o ffe r a n a m e n d m e n t to
t h e bil': o r o t h e r m a t t e r u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n , a n d a f t e r t h e p r e v io u s
q u e s t io n is s e c o n d e d , su c h m e m b e r s h a ll be e n t i t le d t o o ffe r b is a m e n d
m e n t in p u r s u a n c e o f su c h n o tic e .
(M a n u a l, 1 9 1 3 , p. 2 1 .)
House.
5 0 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll b e n s f o l l o w s : “ S h a ll th e m a in
q u e s t io n b e n o w p u t ? ” a n d , u n t il it is d e c id e d , s h a ll p r e c lu d e a ll
a m e n d m e n ts an d d e b a te.
I f t h i s q u e s t io n s h a ll b e d e c id e d in t h e
a f f ir m a t iv e , t h e “ m a in q u e s t io n ” s h a ll b e on th e p a s s a g e o f t h e b i ll,
r e s o lu t io n , o r o t h e r m a t t e r u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n , h u t w h e n a m e n d m e n t s
a r e p e n d in g , t h e q u e s t io n s h a ll be t a k e n u p o n s u c h a m e n d m e n t s , in
t h e ir o r d e r , w i t h o u t f u r t h e r d e b a t e o r a m e n d m e n t .
I f su c h q u e s t io n
be d e c id e d in t h e n e g a t iv e , t h e m a in q u e s t io n s h a ll b e c o n s id e r e d a s
r e m a in in g u n d e r d e b a t e : Provided, T h a t no o n e s h a ll m o v e th e p r e v io u s
q u e s t io n e x c e p t t h e m e m b e r s u b m it t i n g t h e r e p o r t on t h e hilt o r o t h e r
m a t t e r u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n , a n d th e m e m b e r i n t r o d u c in g th e b ill or
o t h e r m a t t e r u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n , o r t h e m e m b e r in c h a r g e o f th o
m e a s u r e , w h o s h a ll be d e s ig n a t e d b y t h e c h a ir m a n o f t h e c o m m it t e e
r e p o r t in g th e s a m e to th e h o u s e a t t h e t im e t h e b ill o r o t h e r m a t t e r
u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n is r e p o r te d to t h e h o u s e o r t a k e n u p f o r c o n s id e r a
tio n .
81722— 14548
I
W h e n a m o tio n f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n is m a d e , a n d p e n d in g th e
s e c o n d t h e r e t o b y a m a j o r i t y , d e b a t e s h a ll c e a s e ; b u t i f a n y m e m b e r
o b t a i n s t h e flo o r h e m a y m o v e t o la y th e m a t t e r u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n
o n t h e t a b le , o r m o v e a n a d jo u r n m e n t , a n d w h e n b o t h o r e it h e r o f t h e s e
m o t io n s a r e p e n d in g th e q u e s t io n s h a ll s t a n d :
(1 ) P r e v io u s q u e s t io n .
( 2 ) T o a d jo u r n .
( 3 ) T o l a y o n t h e t a b le .
A n d th e n u p o n t h e m a in q u e s t io n , o r a m e n d m e n t s , o r t h e m o t io n t o
p o s tp o n e in d e fin it e ly , p o s tp o n e t o a d a y c e r t a in , t o c o m m it , o r a m e n d ,
in t h e o r d e r o f t h e ir p r e c e d e n c e , u n t il t h e m a in q u e s t io n is r e a c h e d or
d is p o s e d o f ; b u t a f t e r th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n h a s been c a lle d b y a m a
jo r i t y n o m o t io n , a m e n d m e n t , o r d e b a t e s h a ll b e in o r d e r .
A l l m o t io n s b e lo w th e m o tio n t o la y o n t h e t a b le m u s t be m a d e p r io r
t o a m o tio n f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n ; b u t, p e n d in g a n d n o t a f t e r th e
s e c o n d th e r e fo r , b y th e m a j o r i t y o f t h e h o u s e , a m o tio n to a d jo u r n
o r la y on t h e t a b le , o r b o t h , a r e in o r d e r .
T h i s c o n s t it u t e s t h e p r e c e
d e n c e o f th e m o t io n t o a d jo u r n a n d la y o n t h e t a b le o v e r o t h e r m o t io n s
in r u le 2 5 .
M o t i o n s s t a n d a s f o l lo w s in o r d e r o f p r e c e d e n c e in r u le 2 0 : T,av o n
t h e t a b le , p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , p o s tp o n e in d e fin it e ly , p o s tp o n e d e fin it e ly ,
t o c o m m it o r a m e n d .
W h e n th e p r e v io u s q u e s tio n Is c a lle d a ll m o t io n s b e lo w it f a l l, u n le s s
m a d e p r io r t o th e c a l l , a n d a ll m o t io n s a b o v e it a f t e r it s se c o n d b y a
m a j o r i t y r e q u ir e d .
P e n d in g t h e s e c o n d , t h e m o t io n s t o a d jo u r n a n d
la y on t h e t a b le a r c in o r d e r , b u t n o t a f t e r a s e c o n d .
W h e n in o r d e r
a m i e v e r y m o t io n is b e fo r e th e h o u s e , th e q u e s t io n s t a n d s a s f o l l o w s :
P r e v io u s q u e s t io n , a d jo u r n , l a y on th e t a b le , p o s tp o n e in d e fin it e ly , p o s t
p o n e d e fin it e ly , t o c o m m it , a m e n d m e n t to a m e n d m e n t , a m e n d m e n t , s u b
s t i t u t e , b ill.
T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n c o v e r s a ll o t h e r m o t io n s w h e n s e c o n d e d b y a
m a j o r i t y o f t h e h o u s e , a n d p r o c e e d :: b y r e g u la r g r a d a t io n to t h e m a in
q u e s t io n , w i t h o u t d e b a te , a m e n d m e n t , o r m o t io n , u n t il s u c h q u e s t io n is
r e a c h e d o r d is p o s e d o f .
( H o u s e R u le s , 1 9 1 5 , p p . 8 - 1 0 . )
NORTH DAKOTA.
Senate.
8 . W h e n a q u e s t io n is u n d e r d e b a te n o m o tio n s h a ll b e r e c e iv e d e x c e p t
to a d jo u r n , t o la y on th e ta b le , to m o v e f o r th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , to
m o v e t o p o s tp o n e to a d a y c e r t a in , to c o m m it o r a m e n d , to p o s tp o n e
in d e fin it e ly , w h ic h s e v e r a l m o t io n s s h a ll h a v e p re c e d e n c e in th e o r d e r
In w h ic h t h e y a r e n a m e d , a n d n o m o t io n t o p o s tp o n e t o a d a y c e r t a in ,
to c o m m it , to p o s tp o n e in d e fin it e ly , h a v in g been d ^ c id ^ d . s h a ll lie e n te r
t a in e d on th e s a m e d a y a n d a t t h e s a m e s t a g e o f th e b ill o r p r o p o s it io n .
( S e n a t e R u le s , 1 9 1 5 , p . 1 1 .)
House.
1 4 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll he in t h is f o r m : “ S h a ll t h e m a in
q u e s t io n he n o w p u t ? ”
I t s h a ll he a d m it t e d o n ly w h e n d e m a n d e d by
a m a j o r i t y o f th e m e m b e r s p r e s e n t, a n d it s e ffe c t s h a ll he to p u t a n e n d
t o a ll d e b a te a n d b r in g th e h o u s e to a d ir e c t v o t e u p o n t h e a m e n d m e n t s
r e p o r te d by a c o m m it t e e , i f a n y . u p o n th e p e n d in g a m e n d m e n t s a n d
th e n u p o n t h e m a in q u e s t io n .
O n a m o tio n f o r th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n ,
a n d p r io r to th e s e c o n d in g o f th e s a m e , a c a ll o f th e h o u se s h a ll he in
o r d e r , h u t a f t e r a m a j o r i t y s h a ll h a v e s e c o n d e d s u c h m o t io n n o c a ll
s h a ll he in o r d e r p r io r to d e c is io n o f th e m a in q u e s t io n .
1 5 . W h e n t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n is d e c id e d in th e n e g a t iv e it s h a ll
le a v e th e m a in q u e s t io n u n d e r d e b a te f o r th e r e m a in d e r o f th e s i t t i n g
u n le s s s o o n e r d is p o s e d o f in s o m e o t h e r m a n n e r .
1G. A ll in c id e n t a l q u e s t io n s o f o r d e r a r i s i n g a f t e r m o t io n is m a d e f o r
th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , d u r in g th e p e n d e n c y o f su c h m o t io n , o r a f t e r th e
h o u s e s h a ll h a v e d e te r m in e d t h a t th e m a in Q u e stio n s h a ll he n o w p u t
s h a ll b e d e c id e d , w h e t h e r on a p p e a l o r o t h e r w is e , w i t h o u t d e b a te .
( H o u s e R u le s , 1 9 1 5 , p p . 1 3 - 1 4 . )
O H IO
Senate.
1 0 5 . A m o t io n f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll b e e n te r ta in e d o n ly
u p o n th e d e m a n d o f th r e e s e n a t o r s .
T h e p r e s id e n t s h a ll p u t th o ^ q u e s
t io n in t h is f o r m : “ T h e q u e s t io n is . S h a ll th e d e b a t e n o w c l o s e ? " a n d
U n til d e c id e d it s h a ll p r e c lu d e f a r t h e r d e b a te a n d a ll a m e n d m e n t s a n d
m o t io n s , e x c e p t o n e m o t io n t o a d jo u r n , o n e m o t io n to ta k e a r e c e ss, o n e
tn o tio n t o la y on th e ta b le , a n d o n e c a ll o f th e sen ate.^
1 0 3 . A l l in c id e n ta l q u e s t io n s o r q u e s t io n s o f o r d e r 'a r i s i n g a f t e r th o
d e m a n d f o r th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n is m a d e s h a ll b e d e c id e d w i t h o u t d e
b a t e a n d s h a ll n o t be s u b je c t t o a p p e a l.
81722— 14548
42
1 0 7 . A f t e r t h e d e m a n d f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n h a s b ee n s u s t a in e d
n o c a ll o r m o t io n s h a ll he in o r d e r , b u t th e s e n a t e s h a ll b e b r o u g h t t o
an im m e d ia t e v o t e , fir s t u p o n t h e m a in q u e s t io n .
1 0 8 . A g r e e m e n t t o a m o t io n t o r e c o n s id e r a v o t e on a “ m a in o u e s t io n " s h a ll n o t r e v iv e t h e “ p r e v io u s q u e s t io n ,” b u t t h e m a t t e r s h a ll b e
s u b je c t to a m e n d m e n t a n d d e b a te .
( L e g i s l a t i v e M a n u a l, 1 9 1 2 , p p .
2 2 -2 3 .)
House.
5 2 . T h e p r e v io u s q u e s tio n s h a ll b e in t h i s f o r m : “ S h a ll th e d e b a te
now c lo s e ? ”
I t s h a ll be p e r m it t e d w h e n d e m a n d e d b y fiv e o r m o r e
m e m b e r s , a n d m u s t be s u s t a in e d b y a m a jo r i t y v o t e , a n d . u n t il d e c id e d ,
s h a ll p r e c lu d e f u r t h e r d e b a te , a n d a ll a m e n d m e n t s a n d m o t io n s , e x c e p t
o n e m o tio n t o a d jo u r n , a n d o n e m o tio n to la y on ta b le .
5 3 . A l l in c id e n t a l q u e s t io n s o r q u e s t io n s o f o r d e r a r is in g a f t e r a
m o t io n is m a d e f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , a n d p e n d in g su c h m o t io n ,
s h a ll be d e c id e d w i t h o u t d e b a te a n d s h a ll n o t be s u b je c t t o a p u e a l.
5 4 . O n a m o tio n f o r th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , a n d p r io r to v o t in g on th e
s a m e , a c a ll o f th e h o u s e s h a ll be in o r d e r : b u t a f t e r th e d e m a n d f o r
t h e p r e v io u s q u e s tio n s h a ll h a v e been s u s t a in e d n o c a ll s h a ll be in o r d e r ;
a n d th e h o u s e s h a ll be b r o u g h t to a n im m e d ia t e v o t e , fir st u p o n th e
p e n d in g a m e n d m e n t s in th e in v e r s e o r d e r o f t h e ir a g e , a n d th e n u p o n
th e m a in q u e s t io n .
5 5 . I f a m o tio n f o r t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n be n e t s u s t a in e d , t h e s u b
je c t u n d e r c o n s id e r a t io n s h a ll be p r o c e e d e d w ith (h e s a m e a s if th e
m o t io n h a d n o t b ee n m a d e .
( L e g is l a t i v e M a n u a l, 1 9 1 2 , p p . G 9 - 7 5 . )
O KLA H O M A .
Sen ate.
3 3 ( a ) T h e r e s h a ll be a m o t io n f o r th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , w h ic h s h a ll
be s t a t e d in t h e s e w o r d s , t o w i t , “ S h a ll t h e m a in q u e s t io n be n o w
p u t ? ” w h ic h , b e in g o r d e r e d by a m a jo r i t y o f t h e m e m b e r s v o t in g , if
a q u o r u m be p r e s e n t , s h a ll h a v e t h e e ffe c t t o c u t o ff a ll d e b a t e a n d
b r in g th e h o u s e t o a d ir e c t v o t e u p on th e im m e d ia t e q u e s t io n o r q u e s
t io n s on w h ic h it h a s b ee n a s k e d a n d o r d e r e d .
T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n
m a y be a s k e d a n d o r d e r e d u p o n a s in g le m o t io n , a s e r ie s o f m o t io n s
a llo w a b le u n d e r th e r u le s , c r a n a m e n d m e n t o r a m e n d m e n t s , a n d in
c lu d e th e b ill to it s p a s s a g e o r r e je c t io n .
I t s h a ll bo in o r d e r , p e n d in g
t h e m o tio n f o r o r a f t e r th e p r e v io u s n u e s t io n , f o r th e p r e s id e n t t o
e n t e r t a in a n d s u b m it a m o tio n to c o m m it w ith o r w i 'h o u t in s t r u c t io n s
to a s t a n d in g o r s e le c t c o m m it t e e .
( J e f f e r s o n 's M a n u a l, s e c . 2 4 . )
( b ) I f th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n is c a r r ie d , t h e o r ig in a l m o v e r o f th e
m a in q u e s t io n , o r . i f t h e b ill o r r e s o lu tio n o r ig in a t e d in th e o t h e r
h o u s e , th e n th e c h a ir m a n o f (h o c o m m it t e e r e p o r t in g flic s a m e , s h a ll
h a v e th e r i g h t t o c lo s e t h e d e b a t e a n d b e lim it e d to 1 5 m in u t e s , a n d
s h o u ld th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n he o r d e r e d on a s u b je c t d e b a t a b le b e fo r e
t h e s a m e h a s hern d e b a te d th e f r ie n d s a n d o p p o n e n t s o f th e m e a s u r e
s h a ll h a v e 3 0 m in u t e s on e it h e r sid e in w h ic h to d e b a t e t h e q u e s t io n i f
d e s ir e d .
( J e f f e r s o n 's M a n u a l, se c . 3 4 ; B e d B o o k , 1 9 1 2 , v . 2 , p . 1 0 9 . )
House.
4 4 . W h e n a n y d e b a t a b le q u e s tio n is b e fo r e t h e h o u s e a n y m e m b e r
m a y m o v e t h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , b u t b e fo r e it is p u t it s h a ll he s e c
o n d e d b y a t le a s t five m e m b e r s w h e t h e r t h a t q u e s t io n ( c a l 'e d th e m a in
q u e s t io n ) s h a ll n o w he p u t .
I f it p a s s e s in th e a f f ir m a t iv e , th e n th e
m a in q u e s t io n is t o be p u t im m e d ia t e ly , a n d n o m e m b e r s lm li d ” b a tc
It f u r t h e r , e it h e r a d d t o it o r a lt e r : P rovid ed , T h a t a f t e r t h e p r e v io u s
q u e s t io n s h a ll h a v e b ee n a d o p te d th e m o v e r o f th e m a in q u e s t io n o r
t i e c h a ir m a n o f th e c o m m it t e e s h a ll h a v e t h e p r iv ile g e o f c lo s in g t h e
d e b a t e a n d be lim it e d to o n e -f o u r t h h o u r : P rovided fu r th e r . T h a t w h e n
( lie p r e v io u s q u e s t io n h a s been o r d e r e d on a d e b a t a b le p r o p o s it io n w h ic h
lia s n o t b ee n d e b a te d 1 5 m in u t e s in t h e a g g r e g a t e s h a ll b e a llo w e d th e
f r i e n d s a n d o p p o n e n t s o f t h e p r o p o s it io n e a c h b e fo r e p u t t i n g th e m a in
q u e s t io n .
( B e d B o o k , 1 9 1 2 . v . 2 , p 9 G .)
OREGON.
Senate.
37.
T h e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n s h a ll be p u t in t h e f o l lo w i n g f o r m : “ S h a ll
t h e m a in q u e s t io n n o w he p u t ? ”
I t s h a ll o n ly be a d m it t e d w h e n d e
m a n d e d b y a m a j o r i t y o f th e s e n a t o r s p r e s e n t , a n d i t s e ffe c t s h a ll be
to p u t a n e n d to a ll d e b a t e , e x c e p t t h a t th e a u t h o r o f t h e b ill o r o t h e r
m a t t e r b e f o r e th e s e n a t e , s h a ll h a v e t h e r ig h t to c lo s e , a n d t h e s u b je c t
u n d e r d i s c u s s i o n .s h a l l th e r e u p o n be im m e d ia t e ly p u t t o a v o t e .
On a
m o t io n f o r th e p r e v io u s q u e s t io n , p r io r to a v o te o f th e s e n a t e b e in g
t a k e n , a c a ll o f t h e s e n a t e s h a ll b e in o r d e r .
( S e n a t e J o u r n a l, 1 9 1 1 ,
p. 3 5 9 )
S1722— 14548
43
House.
<50. The previous question shall he put in this form : “ Shall the
main question he now p u t ? ” It shall only he admitted when demanded
hy a majority of the members present, and, until it is decided, shall
preclude all amendment and further debate on the main question except
bv the mover of the original motion, who shall be allowed 10 minutes,
tin a motion for the previous question, a roll call shall be in order if
demanded by two members.
31. On a previous question there shall be no debate ; all incidental
questions of order arising after a motion is made for the previous ques
tion, and pending such motion, shall lie decided, whether an appeal or
otherwise, without debate.
(House rules, 1009, p. 7.)
P E N N SY L V A N IA .
Senate.
0.
The motion for the previous question, for postponement, for com
mitment, and for amendment, shall take precedence in the order men
tioned. and a motion for the previous question shall preclude any of
the other motions from being m ade; a motion to postpone shall preclude
n motion to com m it: or to amend a motion to commit shall preclude a
motion to amend. The motion for the previous question, postponement
(other than indefinite postponement), or commitment shall preclude de
bate on the original subject. The previous question shall not be moved
by less than four members.
10. When a call for the previous question has been made and sus
tained, the question shall be upon pending amendments and the main
question in their regular order, and all incidental questions of order
arising after a motion for the previous question has been made, and
pending such motion shall be decided, whether on appeal or other
wise, without debate. (Smith's Legislative Handbook, 1014, p. 1000.)
House.
21. The previous question shall not be moved by less than 20 mem
bers rising for that purpose, and shall be determined without debate;
but when the previous question has been called and sustained it shall
not cut off any pending amendment, but the vote shall be taken without
debate, on (he amendments in their order and then on the main ques
tion. (Smuil's Legislative Handbook, 1914, p. 1031.)
IUIODE ISLA N D .
Senate.
20. There shall he a motion for the previous question, which shall not
he debatable, and which may he asked and ordered upon any bill or sec
tion thereof, amendment, motion, resolution, or question which is
debatable, any of which shall he considered as the main question for
the purpose of applying the previous question. All incidental questions
of order arising after a motion for the previous question has been made,
and before the vote has been taken on the main question, shall be de
cided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate.
When the previous question has been ordered a motion to reconsider
such vote shall not he in order, and no motion to adjourn while a
quorum is present shall he entertained between the taking of such vote
and the taking of the vote on the main question, hut 10 minutes shall
be allowed for further debate upon the main question, during which no
member shall speak more than 3 minutes, and a further period of 10
inimilcs. if desired, shall he allowed for debate to the member introduc
ing the bill or question to be acted upon, or to the member or members
to whom he may yield the floor, at the close of which time, or at the
close of the first iO minutes, in case the introducer docs not desire to
so use ids time, the vote on the main question shall he taken. If inci
dental questions of order are raised after the previous question has
been ordered, the time occupied in deciding such questions shall he
deducted from the time allowed for debate. (Manual, 1914, p. 3o9.)
House.
29. There shall be a motion for the previous question, which shall not
be debatable, and which may he moved, and ordered upon any bill or sec
tion thereof, amendment, motion, resolution, or question which is debat
able, any of which shall he considered as the mam question for the pur
pose of applying the previous question. When a motion for the previous
question lias been made, no other motion shall be entertained by the
speaker until it has been put to the house and decided. Ali incidental
questions of order arising after a motion for the previous question has
been made, and before the vote has been taken on the main question,
shall he decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without achate. When
the previous question has been ordered a motion to reconsider such vote
81722— 14548
I
44
shall not be In order, and no motion to adjourn or to take a recess while
a quorum is present shall be entertained between the taking of such vote
and the taking of the vote on the main question, but 10 minutes shall
be allowed for further debate upon the main question, during which no
member shall sneak more than 3 minutes, and a further period o f 10
minutes, if desired, shall be allowed for debate to the member intro
ducing the bill or question to be acted upon, or to the member or mem
bers to whom he may yield the floor, at the close of which time, or at
the close of the first 10 minutes, in case the introducer does not desire
to so use his time, the vote on the main question shall be taken.
If
incidental questions of order are raised after the previous question has
been ordered, the lime occupied in deciding such questions shall bo
deducted from the time allowed for debate. (Manual, 1914, p. 307.)
SO U T H
CAROLINA.
No information available.
SO U T H
DAKOTA.
Senate.
62. The previous question shall be stated In this form : “ Shall tho
main question be now p u t ? ” and until it is decided shall preclude all
amendments or debate. When it is decided the main question shall not
be now nut, the main question shall be considered as still remaining
under debate.
G3. The effect of the main question being ordered shall be to put
an end to all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote, first, unon
all amendments reported or pending in the inverse order in which they
are offered. After a motion for the previous question has prevailed, it
shall not be in order to move a call of the senate or to move to
adiourn. prior to a decision of the main question.
64.
The senate may at any time, by a majority vote, close all debate
upon a pending amendment, or an amendment thereto, and cause tho
question to be put thereon, and this does not preclude further amend
ments or debate on the main subject.
(Manual 1913, p. 5G 3-566.)
House.
15. On a motion for the previous question and prior to voting on the
same, a call of the house shall be in order, but after the demand for
the previrus question shall have been sustained, no call shall be in
order, and the house shall be brought to an immediate vote— first,
upon the pending amendments in the inverse order of their age, and
then upon the main question. The previous question may be ordered
upon ail recognized motions or amendments which are debatable, and
shall have the effect to cut off all debate and bring the assembly to
a direct vote upon the motion or amendment on which it has been
ordered.
10. When the previous question is decided in the negative it shall
leave the main question under debate for the residue of the sitting,
unless sooner disposed of by taking the question, or in some other
manner.
17. All incidental questions c f order arising after motion is made for
the previous question, during the pending of such motions or after the
House shall have determined that the main question shall now be put,
shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without debate.
(Manual 1913, p. 569.)
T E N N E SSE E .
Senate.
22. The previous question shall be in this fo rm : "S h a ll the main
question be now p u t ? ”
It shall be admitted only when demanded by
a maiority of the members present.
If the previous question is sus
tained. its effect shall be to preclude all future amendments, and termin
ate all debate and bring the senate to a direct vote upon the subiect
or matter to which it was applied ip the call.
(Manual 1890, p. 157.)
House.
55. The previous question shall be in this form : “ Shall the main
question be now p a t ? ’
It shall only be admitted when demanded by
two-thirds of the members present.
And if the call is made and sus
tained. its effect shall be to preclude all future amendments and termi
nate all debate; but it may be applied to the main question, or to thq
main question and amendment, or the main question, amendment, and
amendment to the amendment, and shall bring the house to a direct
vote on the question in the order in which they stand and from tho
point where the call was applied.
But In all debates upon resolu
tions or bills immediately prior to their final passage on third reading
the mover or author of the resolution or bill shall have the right to
81722— 14548
close the debate thereon, and no call for the previous question, nor
any other motion, shall cut off this right in the mover or author of the
measure.
(Manual, 1890, p. 154.)
TEXAS.
Senate.
90. Tending the consideration of any question before the senate, any
senator may call for the previous question, and if seconded by five sena
tors the presiding officer shall submit the question, “ Shall the main
question now he p u t ? ” And if a majority vote is in favor of it, the
main question shall he ordered, the effect of which shall be to cut off
all further amendments and debate and bring the senate to a direct
voto— first, upon pending amendments and motions, if there he a n y :
then upon the main proposition. The previous question may he ordered
on any pending amendment or motion before the senate as a separate
proposition and ho decided by a vote upon said amendment or motion.
(Senate Journal, 1911, p. 172.)
House.
XIII.
1. There shall he a motion for the previous question, which shall
he admitted only when seconded by twenty-five (25) members. It shall
be put by the chair in this m anner: ” The motion has been seconded.
As many as are in favor of ordering the previous question on (here
state on what question or questions) will say ‘ aye,’ ” and then, “ As
many as are opposed say ‘ no.’ ” If ordered by a majority of the mem
bers voting, a quorum being present, it shall have the effect of cutting
off all debate and bringing the house to a direct vote upon the imme
diate question or questions upon which it has been asked and ordered.
2. The previous question may be asked and ordered upon any debat
able single motion or series of motions allowable under the rules, or an
amendment or amendments, or may be made to embrace all authorized
debatable motions or amendments, and include the bill or resolution to
its passage or rejection. It may be applied to motions to postpone to a
anv certain, or indefinitely, or to commit, and can not be laid upon the
table.
3. On the motion for the previous question there shall be no debate,
and ail incidental questions of order after it is made, and pending such
motion, shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise, without
debate.
4. After the previous question has been ordered there shall be no
debate upon the questions on which it has been ordered, or upon inci
dental questions, except only that the mover of the proposition or the
member making the report from the committee, as the case may he,
or, in case of the absence of either of them, any other member desig
nator) by such absentee, shall have the right to close the debate, after
which a vote shall be immediately taken on the amendments, if any
there were, and then on the main question.
5. When the previous question is ordered upon a motion to postone indefinitely cr to amend by striking out the enacting clause of a
ill the mover of a proposition or bill proposed to be so postponed or
amended, or the member reporting the same from a committee, shall
have the right to close the debate on the original proposition, after
which the member moving to postpone or amend shall be allowed to
close the debate on his motion or amendment.
G. No motion for an adjournment or recess shall be in order after
the previous question is seconded until the.final vote upon the main
question shall be taken, unless the roll call shows the absence of a
quorum.
7. A call of the House may be moved offer the previous question
has been ordered. (House Journal, 1913, p. 70.)
C
UTAH .
A
w
Senate.
No rule.
House.
30. The previous question shall be in this form : “ Shall the question
be now p u t ? ”
And its effect, when sustained by a majority of the
members present, shall He to put an end to all debate, except as to the
mover of the matter pending or the chairman of the committee who
reported it, who shall he privileged to close the debate and bring the
House to a vote on the question or questions before i t : Provided, That
when a motion to amend or to commit is pending its effect shall be
to cut off debate and bring the house to a vote on the motion to amend
or commit only and not upon tbe question to be amended or corn-
81722— 14548
4:6
mitted. All incidental questions arising after motion is made for the
previous question shall be decided, whether on appeal or otherwise,
without debate.
The previous question shall be put only when de
manded by two members. (House Journal, 1013, p. — .)
VERM O NT.
Senate.
26. A call for the previous question shall not at any time be in
order.
A motion to adjourn shall always be in order, except when
the Senate is engaged in voting.
(Senate Rules, 1915, p. 17.)
House.
38. A t any time in the course of debate on a debatable question a
member may move “ that debate upon the pending question do now
close,” and the speaker shall put the question to the house without
debate, and if the motion is decided in the affirmative debate shall bo
closed on the immediate pending question.
Or a member may move
“ that debate on the whole question do now close.” and if the motion
be decided in the affirmative debate shall be closed on the whole
question and the main question shall be put in its order, and no
motion, except a motion to substitute either of said motions for the
other, shall be in order until the main question is put and decided.
(House Rules, 1915, p. 40.)
V IR G IN IA .
Senate.
49. Upon a motion for the pending question, seconded by a majority
of the senators present, indicated by a rising or by a recorded vote,
the president shall immediately put the pending question, and all inci
dental questions of order arising after a motion for the pending
question is made, and, pending such motion, shall be decided, whether
on appeal or otherwise, without debate.
50. Upon a motion for the previous question seconded by a majority
of the senators present, indicated by a rising or by a recorded vote,
the president shall immediately put the question : first, upon amend
ments in the ovder prescribed in the rules, and then upon the main
question. If the previous question be net ordered, debate mav continue
as if the motion had not been made.
(Rules, 1914, pp. lG -i 7 .)
House.
65. Tending a debate any member who obtains the floor for that
purpose only and submits no other motion or remark may move for tlio
‘ previous question ” or .he “ pending question,” and in either case the
motion shall be forthwith put to the house. Two-thirds of the members
present shall be required to order the main question, hut a majority
may require an immediate veto upen the pending question, whatever it
may be.
66. The previous question shall be in this form : “ Shall the main
question now be p u t ? ”
If carried, its effect shall be to put an end to
all dibate and bring the house to a direct vote upon a motion to com
mit if pending, then upon amendments reported by a committee if any,
then upon pending amendments, and then upon the main question. If
upon the motion for the previous question the main question be not
ordered, debate may t-ontinuc as if the motion had not been made.
(Rules, 1914, pp. 3 9 -4 0 .)
W A SH IN G TO N .
Senate.
39. The previous question shall net be put unless demanded by three
senators whose names s^all be entered upon the journal, and it shall
then be in this fo rm : “ Shall the main question be now p u t ? ”
When
sustained by a majority of senators present it shall preclude all debate,
and the roll shall be immediately called on the question or questions
before the senate, and all incidental question or questions of order
arising after, the motion is made after the previous question and pending
such motion shall be decided whether on anneal or otherwise without
debate.
(Legislative Manual, 1911, pp. 3 6 -3 7 .)
House.
27. The previous question may be ordered by two-thirds of the mem
bers present upon all recognized motions or amendments which are
debatable, and shall have the effect to cut off all debate and bring the
house to a direct vote upon the motion or amendment on which it has
been ordered. On motion for the previous question and prior to the
seconding of the same a call of the house shall be in order, but such
call shall not be in order thereafter prior to the decision of the main
question.
81722— 14548
*
47
The question is not debatable and can not be amended. The previous
question shall be put in this form : “ Mr. ------------demands the previous
question. As many as are in favor of ordering the previous question
will say ‘A y e ’ ; as many as are opposed will say ‘ No.’ ”
The results of the motion are as follow s:
If determined in the negative, the consideration goes on as if the.
motion had never been made ; if decided in the affirmative, the presiding
officer at once, and without debate, proceeds to put, first, the amend
ments pending and then the main question as amended. If an adjourn
ment is had after the previous question is ordered, the subject comes
up the first thing after the reading of the journal the next day, and
the previous question privileged over all other business, whether new or
unfinished.
(Legislative Manual, 1911, p. 51.)
WEST TIEGINIA.
Senate.
5G. There shall ho a motion for the previous question, which, being
ordered by a majority of members present, if a quorum, shall have the
effect to cut off all debate and bring the senate to direct vote upon the
immediate question or questions on which it has l>oen asked and ordered.
The previous question may be asked and ordered upon a single motion,
a series of motions, or may be made to embrace all authorized motions
and amendments and include the bill to its engrossment and third read
ing, and then, on renewal and second of said motion, to its passage or
rejection.
It shall be in order, pending a motion for or after the pre
vious question shall have been ordered on its passage, for the president
to entertain and submit a motion to commit, with or without instruc
tion, to a standing or select committee: and a motion to lay upon the
table shall be in order on the second and third reading of a bill.
(2) A call of the senate shall not be in order after the previous ques
tion is in order unless it shall appear upon an actual count by the
president that a quorum is not present.
(3 ) All incidental questions of order arising after a motion is made
for the previous question, and, pending such motion, shall be decided
whether an appeal or otherwise, without debate.
(Legislative Manual’
1913, p. 4 4 -4 5 .)
House.
78. If the previous question be demanded by not less than seven
members, the speaker shall, without debate, put the question, " Shall the
main question be now p u t ? ” If this question be decided in the affirma
tive, all further debate shall cease and the vote be at once taken on the
proposition pending before the house. When the house refuses to order
the main question, the consideration of the subject shall be resumed as
if the previous question had not been demanded.
79. The previous question shall not be admitted in the committee of
the whole.
(Legislative Manual, 1918, p. 70.)
W IS C O N S IN .
mt
Senate anil house.
80. Moving previous question. When any bill, memorial, or resolution
is under consideration, any member^ being in order and having the floor
may move the “ previous question,” but such motion must be seconded
by at least 5 senators or 15 members of the assembly.
81. l’uttiug of motion ; ending debate. The previous question being
moved, the presiding officer shall say, “ It requiring 5 senators or 15
members of the assembly, as the case may be, to second the motion for
the previous question, those in favor of sustaining the motion will
rise.
And if a sufficient number rise, the pre/ious question shall be
thereby seconded, and the question shall then be : “ Shall the main ques
tion be now p u t ? ” which question shall be determined by the veas and
nays. The main question being ordered to be now put, its effects shall
be to put an end to all debate and bring the house to a direct vote upon
the pending amendments, if there be any, and then upon the main
question.
82. Main question may remain before house, when.
On taking the
previous question, the house shall decide that the main question ‘ shall
not now be put, the main question shall remain as the question before
the house, in the same stage of proceedings as before the previous ques
tion was moved.
83. One call of house in order, when. On motion for the previous
question, and prior to the ordering of the main question, one call of
the house shall be in order; but after proceedings under such call shall
have been once dispensed with, or after a majority shall have ordered
the main question, no call shall be in order prior to the decision of
such question.
(Manual, 1911, pp. 9 7 -9 8 .)
81722— 14548
/
*
WTO M 1X 0.
Senate.
43. Any member may move the previous question, and if it be sec
onded by three other members, the previous question shall be put in
this fo rm : "S h a ll the main question be now p u t ? ”
The object of this
motion is to bring the senate to a vote on the pending question without
further discussion : and if the motion fails, the discussion may pro
ceed the same as if the motion had not been m ade; if carried, all debate
shall '■ease. and the president shall immediately put the main ques
tion to v o te : First on proposed amendments in their order, and then
on the main question, without debate on further am endm ent: Provided,
That a motion to adjourn and a call of the senate shall each be in
order after the previous question has been sustained and before the
main question is put. but no other motion or call shall be in order,
except to receive the report of the sergeant at arms or to dispense with
the proceedings under the call, and all motions and proceedings au
thorized by this rule shall Ire decided without debate, whether on appeal
or otherwise. (Senate Rules. 1915, p. 13.)
H ouse.
25. Any member may move the previous question, and if it be sec
onded by three other members, the previous question shall be put In
this form. “ The previous question is demanded.”
The obiect of this
motion is to bring the house to a vote on the pending question without
discussion, and if the motion fails, the discussion may pvoce d the same
as if the motion had not been m ade: if carried, all debate shail cease,
and the speaker shall immediately put the question to vote ; first, on
proposed amendments in their order, and then on the main question,
without debate or further am endm ents: Provided, That a motion to
adjourn and a call of the house shall each bo in order after the
“ previous question” has been sustained, and before the main question
is put. but no other motion or call shall be in order, except to receive
the report of the sergeant-at-arms, or to dispense with the proceedings
under the call : and all motions and proceedings authorized by this
rule shall be decided without debate, whether on appeal or otherwise.
(House Journal, 1911, p. 78.)
Mr. HITCHCOCK. Mr. President-----The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla
homa yield to the Senator from Nebraska?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Nebraska.
Mr. HITCHCOCK. I wish to ask tlie Senator whether there
is not a distinction which he ought to draw between the Senate
of the United States and these various legislative bodies, and
also between tlie Senate of tlie United States and tlie House of
Commons in London, the Reichstag in Berlin, and the Chamber
o f Deputies in Paris? In all of those cases the members vote in
accordance with their judgments and their convictions, and
when they come to a vote you get the vote of tlie majority. In
the Senate of tlie United States, however, in tlie case of the
pending bill, you are not permitting Senators to vote in accord
ance with their judgments and in accordance with their convic
tions. You have held a so-called Democratic caucus, and it is
notorious that a number o f the Democratic Senators here are
under caucus compulsion to vote against their judgments and
against tlieir convictions; so that to hold them thus bound and
then compel a vote is to enable 30 Members of the Senate to
represent a majority. Now, those 30 Senators do not constitute
a majority of tlie Senate, and tlie caucus rule coupled with (lie
cloture would not develop the real sense of tlie Senate of tlie
United States. It would not give to tlie majority of tlie Senate
the decision of tlie question. It would be a mechanical, artificial
means o f enabling 36 Senators to decide tlie question. Is not
that a distinction?
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President. I shall be very glad to answer the
Senator. I am glad he asked me the questiou, because it
81722— 14548
affords me an opportunity to answer, and I wish to answer It
frankly and with the truth as I understand it.
I think it the common rule of practice that in all the States
party caucuses or conferences are used when desired to obtain
party harmony in party action.
Under the system that we have of party government, where
the members o f each party line up with complete solidarity on
either side of the aisle— I may say with complete solidarity,
because the exception is very rare—where that is the case, and
where there is a conference or caucus on both sides, it comes
down to a question o f party government; and party government
must be controlled by a majority of the members of the party.
The party then becomes jointly responsible throughout the
Nation for the action of the party in the Senate and House of
Representatives. If the party acts unwisely, the Senator from
Nebraska will be defeated. If it acts wisely, he will not be de
feated, under normal conditions.
That being so, if I have to choose between a Republican
caucus or a Republican conference and a Democratic caucus
or a Democratic conference, I will prefer to yield some por
tion of my judgment to my own Democratic colleagues and
go with them upon a public question. If I find that I can not
in conscience, if I can not as a constitutional duty, go with my
colleagues, however painful it may be to me, I shall reluctantly
go my way and take the consequences. Rut when I yield a part
of my desire I do so freely and voluntarily for the purpose of
accomplishing some measure of good rather than by my nega
tive self-opinionated action preventing anything from being ac
complished. 1 would rather go forward ro some extent than try
to have my own private opinion dominate the majority of my
colleagues and disrupt them and not get anywhere.
I think this practice of the Senate in having no cloture, in
having no time fixed for voting, has destroyed debate in the
Senate and has driven the debate into a conference room, where
colleagues cau get together and express their minds and hearts
to each other and arrive at some measure of solidarity. That
is my opinion about it. I concede to the Senator his right to
do as he sees fit about it, but I do not find it against my own
conscience or my own free will to yield something in my judg
ment to my party associates. I am glad to do that, because
they yield something to me also.
It is a question of mutual compromise between men who are
affiliated together upon a party basis for the public good, and
they go to the country upon party performance or party neglect
or party success in legislation or party defeat in legislation.
I am not willing to defeat the party that put me in power and
turn upon them and rend them to pieces. I am not willing to
disorganize my party and cooperate with Republicans to de
feat my party because the majority of my party colleagues do
not submit to dictation from me. I wish to cooperate with my
party associates and help them when I can. I certainly would
not wish to destroy them. I would prefer to be silent if I can
not agree with them and merely give the reasons why I can not
go with them.
Mr. HITCHCOCK. Well, I-----Mr. OWEN. Just a moment, and then I will yield further
to the Senator. What I want to express is that if we had a
81722— 14548------- 4
50
cloture we would restore debate in the Senate Chamber, and I
would then be glad to listen to debate from Members across the
aisle and learn from them, and I would accept from them any
proposal that I thought for the common good. In writing the
Federal reserve act and taking a part in it many things were
proposed by the Republicans which I gladly accepted, as far as
I was concerned; and I gave them open credit for it, too.
Mr. HITCHCOCK. How could the Senator accept it if he
were restrained by a party caucus?
Mr. OWEN. I was not restrained or coerced by a party cau
cus. I am glad to cooperate of my own free will. I wish the
Senator could appreciate my sentiment in this matter.
Mr. HITCHCOCK. Well, how could he, in the case of this
bill, accept it?
Mr. OWEN. In the case of this bill—the shipping bill—we
have arrived at a conclusion with regard to what the bill
ought to be and have agreed upon it among ourselves. It is
not quite what I would prefer, but I am glad to get this much.
We have had no method of cooperation with tiie Republican
side of the Chamber, who have fought us on every endeavor
we have made on this and every other bill. They have not
given us an opportunity. They have lined up solidly and en
tered into a secret agreement with some of our own Members
who were in partial sympathy with them to suddenly and un
expectedly unhorse us, and they have given us no opportunity
for free debate here or listening to them. They have given
the Democratic Party no opportunity of cooperation, but have
tried, by using some of our Members, to wrongfully deprive
the Democracy of its right to control the Government and be
responsible for government.
Mr. HITCHCOCK. The question which I asked the Senator
he has not perhaps apprehended, or I think he would have at
tempted to answer it.
Mr. OWEN. I will attempt to answer it now, if the Senator
will repeat it.
Mr. HITCHCOCK. Let me put it in the form of an illus
tration.
The Nebraska Legislature is in session. It is true that there
is a limit to debate in that body, but practically every question—
and I believe I am safe in saying every question—is decided
upon nonpartisan lines. The real majority of the Nebraska
Senate, the real majority of the Nebraska House of Representa
tives, when it comes to vote, votes in accordance with its con
victions—each man in accordance with his convictions. When
they can So vote it is proper that there should be a cloture; but
when men are restrained from voting their own convictions,
when you have a machine, when you have a wheel within a
wheel, so that 3G men are controlling the votes of 53 men, then
I doubt very much whether we should have a cloture.
Mr. OWEN. I do not regard it as controlling my vote when
I voluntarily cooperate with other men who are my political
colleagues and yield something of my judgment to them when
they yield something of their judgment to me. I do not feel
like asserting every inch and particle of my opinion and un
generously yielding nothing whatever to my associates who are
generous to me, and then say that I am being coerced by others
because I will not cooperate with them. When I cooperate
81722— 14548
51
with my associates I do it voluntarily. I do not do it under
compulsion. I do it because I want to do it, and because I
know it is necessary to party solidarity and to obtaining re
sponsible action of my own party, whose future success depends
on present harmony.
Mr. HITCHCOCK. The Senator is a Democrat, and he be
lieves in the rule of the majority?
Mr. OWEN. I do, most certainly.
Mr. HITCHCOCK. Yet this mechanical device of the party
caucus destroys the rule of the majority, by giving to S6 men
the power to vote 53 men.
Mr. OWEN. There is a certain measure of truth in what the
Senator says, and there is also serious deduction or inference
which is untrue in what the Senator says. If this body con
sisted of men chosen upon an open ballot from Nebraska and
Missouri and Oklahoma without any party designation, then
the caucus would be held on this floor. As it is, the power is
intrusted to a party, and in order to have party action the
members of it have got to consult among themselves and de
termine the party action. You do not determine the party ac
tion by consulting with Senators on the other side of the Cham
ber who are hostile to the party, who are laying plans wherever
they can to destroy the party and break it down, in order that
they may themselves regain control of the country, and who
show a greater party solidarity than the Democrats ever do.
In a caucus of 53 men all of the members express their views
and concede to each other, fiually reconciling all differences by a
majority vote, because that is the only way such differences
can be reconciled. The implication that an organized majority
of the 53 members of the caucus get together to tyrannize over
the minority of the 53 members is entirely false, I verily believe.
Some members constantly in such conferences find themselves
now in a majority, now in a minority—and out of mutual con
cessions present party harmony ensues and future party success
may be hoped for.
Mr. GALLINGER. Mr. President-----The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla
homa yield to the Senator from New Hampshire?
Mr. OWEN. I yield.
Mr. GALLINGER. If I understood the Senator correctly, he
said that the Democratic Party held caucuses and the Repub
lican Party held caucuses, and, of course, he would follow his
own party.
Mr. OWEN. I used both terms, “ caucus ” and “ conference.”
Mr. GALLINGER. I want to say to the Senator, in all seri
ousness, I have been here nearly 24 years and have attended
every conference when I have been in the city, and the Republi
can Party has never undertaken to bind its members to vote
on any question whatever.
Mr. OWEN. That does not seem to have been necessary.
Mr. GALLINGER. I beg the Senator’s pardon.
Mr. OWEN. I suggested to the Senator that there seemed to
be no necessity of imposing a rule upon a party which holds its
party solidarity without a caucus.
Mr. GALLINGER. That is begging the question. Wbar I
meant to say is that in our conferences, when they are dis81722— 14548
m m m
solved every member of the conference has a right to vote as
he pleases upon any question before the body.
Mr. OWEN. I only infer from the record, and assume that
there is some kind of amiable understanding, which seems to
be sufficient for that purpose, because no Republican ever votes
With the Democrats except on the rarest of occasions. They
vote all together, even when they are obviously wrong and
even on minor questions.
Mr. SMOOT and Mr. THOMAS addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senators will please be in
order. The business of the Senate can not be conducted when
more than one Senator is talking at a time.
Mr. OWEN. Did the Senator from Utah rise to interrupt
me?
Mr. SMOOT. I simply want to add to what the Senator from
New Hampshire has already stated, that not only has the Re
publican Party not held caucuses to bind any Senator, but in
all the time I have been a Senator of the United States I
have had no President of the United States ask me to vote any
way but once, and then President Taft asked me if I could see
my way clear to vote for Canadian reciprocity. I told the Pres
ident I could not. and that I would vote against it.
Mr. OWEN. May I ask the Senator from Utah a question in
response?
Mr. SMOOT. Certainly.
Mr. OWEN. I merely want to ask the Senator from Utah if
it is not n fact tliat tlic last Republican President refused
patronage to Republican Senators who did not vote the way
he wanted them.
Mr. SMOOT. I am sure he did not. I know he did not refuse
it to me. I know I voted against Canadian reciprocity and I
know a majority o f the Republicans voted against it, but I
never have heard-----Mr. OWEN. A letter from the former President’s secretary
was widely published to the effect that the Progressive Repub
licans were very much grieved at the time and made quite a
loud outcry about the treatment they received.
Mr. SMOOT What the newspapers may say is not always
true. I wish to say to the Senator that the only time I was
ever asked to vote for any measure by any President was by
President Taft, and he asked me if I could not see my way
clear to vote for Canadian reciprocity. I told him, “ No; I
could not ” ; and I voted against it and did all I could to defeat
it, and I know a majority of the Republicans voted against it
and tried to defeat it; and I know of none to whom patronage
was denied, as the Senator has referred to that, because of the
fact that they voted against Canadian reciprocity.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President-----Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Colorado.
Mr. THOMAS. I merely wish to say, Mr. President, that
the public were informed, and I have never seen it successfully
denied, that the Congress which ended in March, 1911, which
had a very large Republican majority in both Houses, and
which was therefore controlled by the Republicans in both
Houses, seemed to act with singular unanimity, and it was gen
erally understood that the Republican majority of the Senate
81722— 14548
task
m
53
*
branch of that Congress voted and legislated under the dictation
of a single man, thus making a caucus unnecessary.
Mr. SMITH of Michigan. When was that?
Mr. SMOOT. I should like to ask the Senator a question.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla
homa yield further?
Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Utah.
Mr. SMOOT. What was the bill, or to what legislation has
the Senator from Colorado reference?
Mr. THOMAS. I have reference, Mr. President, to the legis
lation that was enacted under the domination of the then senior
Senator from Rhode Island, Mr. Aldrich.
Mr. SMOOT. I suppose the Senator means the tariff hill, and
I think that he-----Mr. THOMAS. He was the caucus and his mandate was
your law.
Mr. SMOOT. Of course, that is an assertion made wholly
without any truth whatever. I know one thing. I know that he
was not the caucus for the Senator from Utah and I do not
believe he was the caucus for anyone else on this side.
Mr. THOMAS. I do not think that the Senator from Utah
differed very materially from the Senator from Rhode Island
during that Congress. My recollection is that he was his chief
lieutenant.
Mr. SMOOT. As far as that is concerned, I will say that
wherever I believe a principle to be right and any other Senator
may believe the same way I am not going to differ with him, if
he votes his convictions as I do; and I believe the Senator will
admit I always vote what my true convictions are irrespective
of what any man in the world may think of it or may say.
Mr. THOMAS. I concede that; but I want Senators to be
consistent. I vote my convictions, but I am accused of voting
at the dictation of 36 members of my party. Now, is it possible
that because 36 members of my party meet in caucus—and I am
not afraid of the word “ caucus.” Mr. President. I believe in it—
and because I vote in accordance with what the caucus of my
party determines after full deliberation, am I to be accused
also of surrendering my convictions, my freedom of action? It
remains just the same; and I think my short record in this
body will demonstrate the fact, notwithstanding that caucuses
seem at present to be so annoying to those who lepieseut the
other side and also to some who are on this side of the Chamber.
Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President-----The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla
homa yield further to the Senator from Utah?
Mr. SMOOT. There is just one other statement I desire to
make.
Mr. OWEN. I yield.
Mr. SMOOT. Of course, the Senator from Colorado believes
In caucuses. I do not. I think some of the worst legislation
that was ever enacted in Congress has been the result of
caucuses.
. . .
*
„
Mr. THOMAS. Does the Senator believe in conferences?
Mr. SMOOT. I believe in conferences, but I do not believe
the conferences should bind anybody who attends them.
Mr. THOMAS. I have noticed that the conferences which
already have been held by my Republican friends have re81722— 14548
*
54
suited in a unanimity of action and of sentiment that is simply
astonishing.
Mr. SMOOT. I can say to the Senator from Colorado that
I have attended many conferences where there was a divided
vote. I will say this: I do not remember attending a con
ference of the Republican Party where there has been a
unanimity of sentiment.
Mr. THOMAS. I do not know, of course, what is the
unanimity of sentiment in the conference. I am talking about
the unanimity displayed here.
Mr. SMOOT. I will say to the Senator that there has been
no conference held on this bill.
Mr. THOMAS. Then there is a mysterious magnetic some
thing which seems to act of its own volition and which binds
our brethren more closely than any caucus even seems to be
able to bind this side.
Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, I wish to place in the R ecord
at this point the precedents of the English Government, of the
French Government, of the German Government, of the Aus
tria-Hungary Government, of the Austrian Government, and of
the Governments of Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Portugal,
Spain, and Switzerland, and, not desiring to take the time of
the Senate to read them, I will ask to insert them without read
ing with the authority from which it is taken.
The matter referred to is as follows:
E N G L IS H PRECEDENTS.
“ The rule of the majority is the rule in all the parliaments of
English-speaking people. In the Parliament of Great Britain,
in the House of Lords, the ‘ contents’ pass to the right and
the ‘ not contents’ pass to the left, and the majority rules.
“ In the House of Commons the *ayes ’ pass to the right and
the ‘ noes’ pass to the left, and the majority rules. (Encyclo
paedia Britannica, vol. 20, p. 856.)
“ The great English statesman, Mr. Gladstone, having found
that the efficiency of Parliament was destroyed by the right
of unlimited debate, was led to propose cloture in the first
week of the session of 1882. moving this resolution on the 20th
of February, and expressing the opinion that the house should
settle its own procedure. The acts of Mr. Gladstone and others
of like opinion finally led to the termination of unlimited de
bate in the procedure of Parliament. In these debates every
fallacious argument now advanced by those who wish to retain
unlimited debate in the United States Senate has been abun
dantly answered, leaving no ground of sound Reasoning to recon
sider these stale and exploded arguments.
“ The cloture of debate is very commonly used in the Houses
of Parliament in Great Britain; for example, in standing order
No. 26. The return to order of the House of Commons, dated
December 12, 1906, shows that the cloture was moved 112 times.
(See vol. 94, Great Britain House of Commons, sessional papers.
1906.)
FR A N C E.
“ In France the cloture is moved by one or more members cry
ing out ‘ La cloture! ’
“ The president immediately puts the question, and if a member of the
minority wishes to speak he is allowed to assign his reasons against
81722— 14548
55
the close of the debate, but no one can speak in support of the
and only one member against itThe question is then put
president, ‘ Shall the debate be c lo se d ?’ and if it is resolved
affirmative the debate is closed and the main question is put
vote.
motion
by the
in the
to the
“ M. Gnizot, speaking on tlie efficacy of the cloture before a
committee of the House of Commons in 1S48, said:
“ I think that in our chamber it was an indispensable power, and I
think it has not been used unjustlv or improperly generally.
Calling
to mind what has passed of late years, I do not recollect any serious
and honest complaint of the cloture. In the French Chambers, as they
have been during the last 34 years, no member can imagine that the
debate would have been properly conducted without the power of pro
nouncing the cloture.
“ He also stated iu another part of his evidence that—
“ Before the introduction of the cloture in 1814 the debates were pro
tracted indefinitely, aud not only were they protracted, but at the end,
when the majority wished to put an end to the debate and the minority
would not. the debate became very violent for protracting the debate,
and out of the house among the public it was a source of ridicule.
“ The French also allow the previous question, and it can al- •
ways be moved; it can not be proposed on motions for which
urgency is claimed, except after the report of the committee of
initiative. (Dickinson’s Rules and Procedure of Foreign Par
liaments. p. 420.)
G ERM A N Y.
“ The majority rule controls likewise in the German Empire
and they have the cloture upon the support of 00 members of
the house, which is immediately voted on at any time by a
show of hands or by the ayes and noes.
A U S TR IA -H U N G A R Y .
“ In Austria-Hungary motions for the closing of the debate
are to be put to the vote at once by the president without any
question, and thereupon the matter is determined. If the ma
jority decides for a close of the debate, the members whose
names are put down to speak for or against the motions may
choose from amongst them one speaker on each side, and the
matter is disposed of by voting a simple yes or no. (Ibid., p.
404.)
AU STR IA .
“Austria also, in its independent houses of Parliament, has
the cloture, which may be put to the vote at any time in both
houses, and a small majority suffices to carry it. This is done,
however, without interrupting any speech in actual course of
delivery, and when the vote to close the debate is passed each
side has one member represented in a final speech on the ques
tion. (Ibid., p. 409.)
BELG IUM .
“ In Belgium they have the cloture, and if the prime minister
and president of the Chamber are satisfied that there is need of
closing the debate a hint is given to some member to raise the
cry of ‘ La cloture,’ after a member of the opposition has con
cluded his speech, and upon the demand of 10 members, grant
ing permission, however, to speak for or against the motion
under restrictions. The method here does not prevent any rea
sonable debate, but permits a termination of the debate by the
will of the majority. The same rule is followed in the Senate
of Belgium. (Dickinson’s Rules and Procedure of Foreign Par
liaments, p. 420.)
81722— 14548
---- A 1
J
D EN M ARK . '
“ In Denmark also they have the clotnre, which can be pro
posed by the president of the Danish chambers, which is de
cided by the chamber without debate. Fifteen members of the
Landsthing may demand the cloture. (Ibid., p. 422.)
N E TH E R L A N D S.
“ In both houses of the Parliament o f Netherlands they have
the cloture. Five members of the First Chamber may propose
it and five members may propose it in the Second Chamber.
They have the majority rule. (Ibid., p. 461.)
P O R TU G A L .
“ In Portugal they have the cloture in both chambers, and de
bate may be closed by a special motion, without discretion. In
the upper house they permit two to speak in favor of and two
against it. The cloture may be voted. (Ibid., p. 469.)
“ The cloture in Spain may be said to exist indirectly, and to
result from the action allowed the president on the order of
parliamentary discussion. (Ibid., p. 477.)
S W IT Z E R L A N D .
“ The cloture exists in Switzerland both in the Conseil des
Etatc and Conseil National.”
Mr. GALLINGER. Has the Senator the rules or the law gov
erning the Canadian Parliament?
Mr. OWEN. No; I have not.
Mr. GALLINGER. They have no previous question I be
lieve; they have unlimited debate.
Mr. OWEN. They have no need for it, as there is unanimity
of sentiment and reciprocal courtesy in their comparatively
small Parliament.
Mr. GALLINGER. They succeeded in defeating the reci
procity bill because of that fact.
Mr. OWEN. Oh. I think not “ because o f that fact.” Mr.
President. Now, Mr. President, I want to call the attention of
the Senate to an editorial from one of the greatest journals of
the country that I think is worthy of very respectful attention,
the New York World of January 29, 1915:
SET T H E SEN ATE FREE.
The Republican minority in the Senate which is attempting to talk
the ship-purchase bill to death is also attempting to talk majority rule
to death. If by its filibuster it can prevent action before the expiration
of Congress on March 4, it will have defeated majority rule as em
phatically as would gunmen at a polling place who drove intending
voters away from the ballot box.
It is claimed on behalf of this minority that it is exercising the right
of debate and merely asserting the time-honored privileges of the Senate
In truth, it is preventing reasonable debate, and the privileges to which
it refers ought to be protected from abuse, as they have been by other
legislative bodies. The British House of Commons, the mother of par
liaments, exceedingly jealous of every real right and privilege throt
tles those who would throttle it—
I commend that sentiment to the attention of the Senate of
the United States—
The American House of Representatives has not once been coerced by
a minority since the Reed rules were established 25 years ago.
Evidently the time must soon come when a courageous majority of
the Senate will emancipate itself from a thraldom hum iliating'alike to
Itself and to the people. Every right properly belonging to minorities
must be safeguarded, but no minority has a right to rule, no minority
has a right to establish by indirection policies which it has not the votes
81722— 14548
57
to
carry, and no minority anywhere in this country, except In the United
States Senate, maintains such a pretense.
The seventeenth amendment, providing for the popular election of
Senators, was a Democratic measure in its origin, and to the present
Democratic administration fell the honor of proclaiming its adoption.
W hy should not the same party complete the reform by such a revision
of the Senate rules as to strip of power those who obstruct the popular
will lawfully expressed?
Now, Mr. President, 1 want to say just one or two words
before I close. Some of our Democratic brethren in the South,
still haunted by the old fear of a force bill led by the Senator
from Massachusetts [Mr. L odge], believe that it would be dan
gerous to abandon the alleged right of the minority to conduct
an endless filibuster and thereby obstruct anything to which
the minority seriously objects. What I want to call to the
attention o f the Senate is that under the change of the Con
stitution providing for the direct election o f Senators by popu
lar vote the Senate of the United States never can again be
made the instrumentality of privilege or plutocracy or monop
oly or organized greed; never can again, by a majority of this
body, be controlled against the interests and the welfare o f the
common people of this country. The majority always in the
future, till time shall be no more, will represent in truth the
sovereignty of the common people of this country. That being
so, I do not see how a man who is a heartfelt Democrat can
reconcile it to his conscience to put in the hands of those who
are at heart opposed to the sovereignty of the people the right
to obstruct their will and prevent legislation which the people
desire.
I have said on the floor to the Senator from New York [Mr.
R oot] that this filibuster was preventing the presentation of
the rural credits bill. What is the use of a committee bringing
forward a bill that has no possible chance of consideration? If
that were possible now, if we had a reasonable cloture, the
Banking and Currency Committee could get together and in all
probability agree upon some measure acceptable to them, ac
ceptable to the Senate, and acceptable to the country. But that
is a small part of the terrible harm being done. This fili
buster is not only preventing the rural credits bill from be
ing considered; it is preventing this whole calendar, page after
page, of listed bills that are important to the country, from
receiving any consideration at all. This body is presenting the
strange, unthinkable, sad spectacle to the country that a
majority is willing to stay here all day and all night, night
after night, in order to exercise the constitutional privilege of
voting their wishes as representatives of the people of the
United States, while an organized filibuster prevents the ma
jority rule; prevents even a vote.
We can not consider rural credits, good roads, waterways,
justice to labor, the employment of the unemployed, the public
health, and the many vital questions affecting the conservation
and development of human life and energy. We are paralyzed
by partisan bigotry and ambition.
I say to the Senate that the people of the United States are
not going to submit to this wrong any more. It is an outrage
on justice; it is shameful; it is despicable; and no words within
the scope of a parliamentary language are strong enough to ex
press my condemnation of it.
I yield the floor, Mr. President.
81722— 14548
[From the North American Review of November, 1893.]
T h e S tr u g g le in t h e S e n a t e ,
i i . o b s t r u c t io n in t h e s e n a t e .
[By Senator I I e n ry C a b o t L odge , of Massachusetts.]
Parliamentary obstruction has of late years engaged public attention
to a degree quite unusual for a subject so technical in its nature.
When the Reed rules, which first brought the subject into prominence in
this country, were under discussion, I pointed out in an article in the
Nineteenth Century that the question was widespread and general and
in no sense local or peculiar to the United States. A t that time the
Democratic orators and the Democratic newspapers seemed to think
that the effort to do away with parliamentary obstruction in the House
of Representatives was a malignant invention of the Republican Party
and particularly of Mr. Reed. If they had taken the trouble to inform
themselves— a form of mental exercise in which they rarely indulge— •
they would have discovered that it was nothing of the sort.
They
would have learned what is now evident to all men that the Republican
reform of the rules of the House was but part of a general movement
against an abuse which in the process of time had become intolerable.
Not only in many States of the Union but in England also the matter
of parliamentary obstruction had reached the proportion of a great and
a very grave public question.
This was neither accidental nor the
result of partisanship.
It was the outgrowth of conditions which had
been slowly developed.
The English-speaking race are the originators of free representative
government.
Among them this great system has grown to maturity
and by them its details have been gradually elaborated.
The funda
mental principles of popular representation and of free speech, of the
control of taxation, and of public expenditures, were established long
since as the result of many hard-fought battles. W ith this development
of representative government there should have gone hand in hand a
development of the rules by which the representative bodies transacted
their business. This, however, did not occur. As so often happens in
history, the substance of things changed, but the forms survived.
While the power and the business of representative bodies both in
England and the United States expanded enormously, the rules in
accordance with which these powers were exercised and this business
transacted remained unaltered. Ordinarily forms are not of much con
sequence provided the essence of things is preserved, but in this in
stance it happened that forms and rules were of vital importance, al
though it is only very recently that this fact has been fully and prop
erly realized.
, ,
.
The rules and practices of the Congress of the United States and or
the House of Commons were adopted under conditions widely different
from those which exist to-day.
They were formed for representative
bodies, in this country at least, much smaller in number, and for the
management of the public affairs of small populations, with industrial
and commercial interests absolutely insignificant when compared with
the vast volume of business to-day, quickened as it now is by the tele
graph and the railroad, and beating with a pulsation which is felt in
every corner of the globe within 2-1 hours. The result has been that the
old rules and forms have not only proved inadequate for the transaction
of business, but have furnished the means for indefinite resistance to
action. When parliamentary rules were first formulated, the preserva
tion of freedom of debate was rightly considered to be of the last im
portance, and, so far as these original rules, which were in great de
gree haphazard, could be said to have any principle, the protection of
freedom of debate was their controlling purpose. All danger to freedom
of debate in English-speaking countries at least has long since van
ished, and the tendency of the old system is to encourage debate, of
which there is now too much, and to prevent action, of which there is
now too little.
, ,
„
The primary and the only proper and intelligent object of all par
liamentary law and rules is to provide for and to facilitate the ordi
nary action of public business.
When any set of parliamentary rules
ceases to accomplish this object they have become an abuse— and an
abuse of the worst kind. They not only prevent action, but, what is
far worse, they destroy responsibility; for, if a minority can prevent
action, the majority, which is entitled to rule and is intrusted with
power, is at once divested of all responsibility, the great safeguard of
free representative institutions.
81722— 14548
59
This question has been fought out in the English House of Commons
and the passage of the home rule bill is conclusive evidence that the
system of enforcing action is not only necessary in England, but that
it is finally and firmly established. The same battle has been fought
out also, and the same result attained, in our own House of Repre
sentatives.
The great reform which Mr. Reed carried through and
which marks an epoch in parliamentary government in the United
States has been in principle finally established.
Received at the mo
ment with much passionate oratory and many loud objurgations, such
as always accompany the onward march and the ultimate triumph of a
great reform, it has at last prevailed. As the dust of that memorable
conflict cleared away, it was discovered that Mr. Reed had only been
enforcing principles which were accepted in nearly every other parlia
mentary body in the world and that he had not invented them himself
for the mere gratification of a tyrannical spirit. Then it was further
disco.ered that his methods, instead of being illegal and unconstitu
tional, had received the sanction of every judicial body before which
they had been brought, and they were finally upheld by the unanimous
decision of the Supreme Court of the United States.
The last stage, the acceptance of the reform by the opposite political
party, has just been passed.
Mr. Speaker Crisp, with a large Demo
cratic majority at his back, has enforced Mr. Reed’ s principles by stop
ping dilatory motions and bringing the House to a vote. The only dif
ference has been that Mr. Reed put his principles into practice under
accepted methods and in accordance with parliamentary law, while Mr.
Crisp very unnecessarily, because no such violence was required, en
forced action with entire disregard of the usual and proper forms. He
is not, however, to be too severely criticized for this.
It was quite
natural that the Democratic Party in the House should writhe at
adopting the principles and carrying into effect the very methods which
they had denounced so exuberantly only three years ago.
They ap
peared to think that they could get around by some bypath to the Re
publican result, and thus cscapg-a march through the valley of humilia
tion, if they discarded the forms under which their adversaries had
performed the same work. Unfortunately such evasions are never pos
sible and the valley of humiliation can not be avoided by those who
have opposed what is righteous, and then, after a short interval, have
accepted righteousness for their own purposes. In any event the result
is the same. The right of the majority to rule, and to pass after due
debate such measures as it sees fit, has been firmly established in the
House of Representatives.
As a practical public question in the United States, parliamentary ob
struction has now shifted to the Senate, where it has aroused lately the
keenest public interest ow'ing to the condition of business and the in
tense /eagerness of the country for the passage of some measure of re
lief. The case in the Senate is very different in many particulars from
what it was either in the House of Commons or the House of Repre
sentatives. The Senate of the United States is still a small body : it
has great powers conferred upon it by the Constitution and weighty
responsibility. It is properly very conservative in its habits and very
slow to change those habits in any direction.
Tliere could be no
better example of this than in its parliamentary procedure. The rules
of the Senate are practically unchanged from what they were at the
beginning
They are the same now to all intents and purposes as
when they were first adopted more than a hundred years ago. There
has never been in the Senate any rule which enabled the majority to
close debate or compel a vote.
The previous question, which existed
in the earliest years, and was abandoned in 1800, was the previous
question of England and not that with which every one is familiar
to-day in our House of Representatives. It was not in practice a form
of closure and it is therefore correct to say that the power of closing
debate in the modern sense has never existed in the Senate.
The rules of the Senate are few and simple. Formed for the use of
a body of 26 Senators, t.hev- have continued in force unchanged, until
they now govern the deliberations of 88. That rules so simple should
have worked so well during so long a period with an increasing number
of Senators and an enormous growth in the volume of business is no
slight tribute to the character of the body which has worked under
them. But they are now beginning to show the same defects and abuses,
arising from the same causes, which have produced such fundamental
changes in larger representative bodies.
The rules of the Senate, providing for no form of compulsion, rest
necessarily on courtesy. In other words, as there is no power to compel
action, it is assumed that the need for compulsion will never arise.
81722— 14548
For this reason, obstruction In the Senate, when It has occurred, has
never taken the form of dilatory motions and continual roll calls, which
have been the accepted method of filibustering in the House.
The
weapon of obstruction in the Senate is debate, upon which the Senate
rules place no check whatever.
Practically speaking, under the rules,
or rather the courtesy of the Senate, each Senator can speak as often
and at as great length as he chooses. There is not only no previous
question to cut him off, but a time can not even be set for taking a
vote, except by unanimous consent.
This is all very well in theory,
and there is much to be said for the maintenance of a system, in one
branch at least of the Government, where debate shall be entirely un
trammeled. But the essence of a system of courtesy is that it should
be the same at all points. The two great rights in our representative
bodies are voting and debate.
If the courtesy of unlimited debate is
granted it must carry with it the reciprocal courtesy of permitting a
vote after due discussion.
If this is not the case the system is im
possible. Of the two rights, moreover, that of voting is the higher and
more important. We ought to have both, and debate certainly in ample
m easure; but, if we are forced to choose between them, the right of
action must prevail over the right of discussion. To vote without de
bating is perilous, but to debate and never vote is imbecile. The dif
ficulty in the Senate to-day is that, while the courtesy which permits
unlimited debate is observed, the reciprocal courtesy, which should in
sure the opportunity to vote, is wholly disregarded.
If the system of reciprocal courtesy could be reestablished and ob
served, there need be no change in the Senate rules. As it is, there
must be a change, for the delays which now take place are discrediting
the Senate and this is something greatly to be deplored. The Senate was
perhaps the greatest single achievement of the makers of the Constitu
tion. It is one of the strongest bulwarks of our system of government,
and anything which lowers it in the eyes of the people is a most serious
matter. How the Senate may vote on any given question at any given
time is of secondary importance, but when it is seen that it is unable
to take any action at all the situation becomes of the gravest character.
A body which can not govern itself will not long hold the respect of the
people who have chosen it to govern the country.
No extreme or violent change is needed in order to remedy the exist
ing condition of affairs. A simple rule giving the majority power to
fix a time for taking a vote upon any measure which has been before
the Senate and under discussion, say for 30 days, would be all sufficient.
Such a change should be made and such a rule passed, for the majority
ought to have and must have full power and responsibility.
On this point of the power of the majority, however, there is a great
deal of popular misconception.
It is customary to assail with bitter
reproaches, as we have seen during the struggle over silver repeal, the
minority who are resisting action. This is putting the blame in the
wrong place. The minority may be justly censured for not conforming
to a system of courtesy, but when that system has been overthrown, as
is the case in the Senate in regard to voting and debate, the fault is no
longer theirs.
No minority is ever to blame for obstruction.
If the
rules permit them to obstruct, they are lawfully entitled to use those
rules in order to stop a measure which they deem injurious. The blame
for obstruction rests with the majority, and if there is obstruction it is
because the majority permit it. The majority to which I here refer is
the party majority in control of the Chamber. They may be divided on
a given measure, but they, and they alone, are responsible for the gen
eral conduct of business. They, and they alone, can secure action and
Initiate proceedings to bring the body whose machinery they control to
a vote. The long delay on the repeal of the purchasing clause of the
silver act of 1890 has been due, without any reference to their internal
divisions on the pending question, solely to the Democratic majority
as a whole in full control of the Chamber and of the machinery of
legislation. There never was a time when they could not have brought
about a vote with the assistance of the Chair, whose occupant was also
of their party, if, as a party, they had only chosen to do so.
No further argument is, I think, needed to show the necessity of
some rule which, after allowing the most liberal latitude of debate, will
yet enable the majority of the Senate to compel a vote. The prospects,
however, of any such change are not very promising.
It is not prob
able that any form of closure will be adopted by the Senate for some
time to come.
It will certainly never be attained unless the popular
demand for it is not only urgent but intelligent. Newspapers and peole generally have a way of rising up and demanding that filibustering
e put down and closure enforced whenever- some measure in which
§
81722—14548
61
they are specially Interested at the moment Is obstructed. On the other
hand, filibustering is often regarded as very patriotic by people who do
not want a given measure to pass. Many of the newspapers, for ex
ample, which have been shouting themselves hoarse over the obstruc
tion to silver repeal in the Senate, loudly applauded precisely the same
methods of obstruction when directed against the Federal elections bill a
few years ago.
It is this fact which takes all weight from the de
mands of the most vociferous shouters for action at the present time.
Obstruction must be always good and proper or always bad and im
proper.
It can not be sometimes good and sometimes bad as a prin
ciple of action. If the power to close debate is righteous for one meas
ure it is righteous for a l l ; and until that principle is accepted there is
no possibility of reform. For example, the Democratic majority in the
Senate refuses to change the rules in order to pass silver repeal. They
can not, then, go on and introduce closure to pass the Federal elections
bill and the tariff. They must apply closure to all or none.
The only way in which proper rules for the transaction of business
in the Senate can be obtained will be through the action of a party
committed as a party to the principle that the majority must rule, and
that the parliamentary methods of the Senate must conform to that
principle. The change must also be made at the beginning of the ses
sion, so as to apply to all measures alike which are to come before Con
gress, and it must be carried and established on its own merits as a
general principle of government and not to suit a particular exigency.
Whenever this reform is made it will come and it can come only in this
way.
H e n b y C a b o t L odge .
r
81722—14548
o
@FedFRASER